UKC

Mass generalisation of course.

Witness the foreigners coming over and thrashing our Grit problems.

Our penchant for traveling 'fast and heavy' in the Alps.

That VS/HVS is the average standard in the UK (when, as a hunch, I would suggest we have the strength to climb much harder)

It seems that many other nationalities have a much more 'just get on with it' approach.

Discuss.......

(N.B. This not a dig (veiled or otherwise) at our cutting edge climbers)

Maybe it is that the foreigners who come over are above the average of their own people back home thus giving the impression that all foreigners are better climbers? Conversely should a couple of good british climbers who make the effort to travel somewhere else and climb well would the climbers there get an impression that british climbers are also hard climbers?

In reply to Milesy:

I see your point but not sure I agree. Travel abroad and witness the general standard or climbing.....

In reply to ClimberEd:

Probably, but then grit is overrated a lot, in this country and abroad, probably due to the large amount of films and other publicity associated with grit.

Lots of Brits don't climb quickly and fluidly in the Alps through lack of practice - if you only do 5 Alpine routes a year then you're not going to become a super slick monster without some sustained practice. Lets face it, there are few places in Britain where the ability to keep climbing slickly and smoothly all day is essential to completing the route safely, so most people don't bother to learn this skill and this skill only becomes relevant on Alpine scale routes anyway.

VS/HVS may be the mean grade climbed - developing the mental stamina to push on and do harder routes takes effort as well as developing the strength. The increasing popularity of bouldering has helped many people get lots stronger but less attention is paid by most people to developing mental strength and stamina. As a result I think many climbers could climb a lot harder than they do, largely due to not developing the mental side of their climbing. This doesn't really matter as such, as long as people are satisfied with their climbing then why bother climbing harder?

I agree with Milesy. Generally people who are willing to go overseas to climb are above average climbing ability, giving a false representation.

In reply to ClimberEd:
I think many climbers (not all) here are willing to settle for less effort sometimes. Is it a coincidence that the average climber here leads about HVS but apparently pretty much everyone in the Basque country climbs 8c? Some great stuff in 9/10 climbers about this.

In reply to ClimberEd: Not just any old foreigners, foreign wads came over and crushed the grit... they were Athletes from a BIG country, America, so have a bigger gene pool and are all at the top of their game in the US. They came with a slightly less historic view of the place and bags of talent... why wouldn't they thrash our problems? They headpointed End of the Affair which has been onsighted and flashed by many brits now...

I think the VS/HVS average in the UK compared to say higher in France or Spain is due to the fact that maybe sport climbing is more enjoyable if you push yourself, and also bolt-protected so you aren't going to end up run-out on dwindling strengtha with loads of crap gear in. In the UK maybe some people climb for different reasons??

Also is VS/HVS really the average? I barely know anyone who hasn't just started who doesn't lead harder than that!

Also the 'onsight' ethic potentially slows down improvement, whereas in other countries toproping is totally legit...

who knows though, maybe we are just cr*p!?!?

DC

In reply to ClimberEd:

My journeys abroad have usually seen the locals setting up lines of top ropes on 4a sport routes.

There are people who climb hard, bold, easy, safe and everything in between. I don't think nationality comes into it.

In reply to MattG:

Also the fact that E1 stands for 'Extreme' probably puts a lot of people off, whereas if it was labelled '6a climbing where you put your own gear in but the gear is good so it's not too dangerous' then many more people would probably lead E1 week in week out. After all, no-one thinks F6a is hard do they?

In reply to ClimberEd:

Some interesting points.

Although curiously, I notice that there is not much disagreement, more 'explanations' as to why.

So grit is over rated. Perhaps. I don't think it is as a great rock to climb on, but perhaps it's difficulty is.

And yes, we can't move slickly, perhaps we should work on that, it's an important skill if you want to be a rounded climber.

In reply to NorthernGrit:

I do.

Well, not the gene pool per se. More attitudes. As the next poster said, 6a isn't considered hard, but E1 is 'extreme 1'

In reply to ClimberEd:

Is it a trad/sports thing?
Climbing abroad on bolts, my partner and I are always climbing at the lowest end of what others are doing.
On trad, we seem to be closer to our normal place in the pecking order (ie average).

In reply to NorthernGrit:

Although i would agree with the implication made earlier that ability tends to accumulate in 'pockets'. If you climb with people who regularly onsight E4 you're bound to push yourself more than climbing with people who bumble about on Vdiff week after week. Nothing wrong with either of those approaches by the way.

It may surprise some people to know there are a lot of climbers who don't have the least interest in pushing themselves. They just enjoy being out on the rock.

In reply to Duncan Campbell:

The majority of climbers I know (many of whom have been climbing for decades) lead below that

In reply to Duncan Campbell:
The average grade is more like HS /VS a visit to most UK crags confirms that too. See way more people climbing VS and under than HVS and over IMO

See this for more info
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/graphs.html

In reply to Toreador: Really!?!?! Bloomin' Heck!!!

I would also like to know what is the (probably impossible) average trad grade of foreign climbers? If trad is not big on the continent then how it can climbers be compared like for like anyway?

In reply to ClimberEd:
Interesting comments here - http://onlineclimbingcoach.blogspot.com/search/label/Perspective?updated-ma...

In reply to Duncan Campbell:
See the ukc log books I linked above average logged grade for some years has been HS. Which if you look about a crag with a good spread of grades seems to be representive IMO.

In reply to Duncan Campbell:


you dont? I'v never met anyone who "just started" climbing who leads that! kinda depends on your definition of "just started" I suppose....

In reply to Duncan Campbell:


Not that is helps much but I agree that a) I thought the average climber in the UK has a "best" trad lead grade of around VS and b) empirical evidence (ie. hanging around crags for 15 years or so) would tend to confirm that.

If you mix with "good" climbers, you will tend to assume everyone climbs hard. And if you go to "hard" crags, you won't see the thousands of punters flailing around on V Diffs. Actually, the last time I climbed on grit I was flailing around on V Diffs

As to your OP, I would tend to agree that the trad mentality does mean that many Brits climb comfortably within their ability both on trad and sport. I suspect I am not untypical of many Brits in that I started out purely trad and have increased my sports climbing over time but still retain the on-sight mentality (so it's more bolt clipping than sports climbing per se).

As to "good" Brit climbers being risk averse, I'd say the opposite is true actually.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

But that's the average grade of climbs logged, not the average best grade of UKC users. I could go out and solo a load of V Diffs and it would drop the average. Everyone logs a spread of grades, with an average necessarily lower than their best.

In reply to robinsi197:

err yes I never stated it was the average best grade and in the context of the discussion most people seemed to be talking about the average grade climbed not the average best grades!

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Fair enough. I read the OP's "That VS/HVS is the average standard in the UK" the other way - in relation to the climbers, not the climbs, but I can see where you're coming from.

In reply to ClimberEd:

Climbing on bolts on the continent has much to do with it. Climbers get to climb harder with less risk, so they get better.

However, what's your average French or Spanish climber ever done on grit? ;0)

In reply to James Oswald:

I'm a bit dubious about that - admittedly I've never been to Spain but from trips to France can confirm that plenty of people are climbing F5 / low 6s.

The weather probably plays a part in limiting the amount of mileage we manage to get in.

In reply to robhorton:


once more with feeling....

In reply to robhorton:

yeh but, checking your profile, you're the person this thread is aimed at, no...?

In reply to teflonpete: I think also that with a load of well bolted climbs next to each other you tend to just do a lot more climbing. I got a chance to climb at Llanymynech last weekend and did 7 routes (all 5s and 6as) in about two and half hours. When I go trad climbing (unless climbing really easy routes) I just never get that many routes done in such a short time - particularly not ones that are up to 25 mtrs long like the Llanymynech. I think you are just going get stronger if your home cliffs are well bolted and with lots of routes around the grades you can climb.

In reply to ClimberEd:

I think if you want to generalise the uk situatuion then yes, most climbers are risk averse.

How many threads do you see on UKC with people asking for recommendations on "E1's which are safe" etc. No one ever asks for the HVS/E1's that are an absolute piece of p*ss climbing wise but lacking in protection. Sunset slab at froggatt for example.

just my thoughts.

i guess for most people there is a lot to lose by tackling hard/protectionless routes with a wife and kids at home.

In reply to ClimberEd:


It rains all the time.

Think of the possibilities with a climate like Spain...

In reply to tom290483:
I think part of my point is perception of risk. What is 'safe' 'doable' and 'dangerous'. Rather than deciding which bucket to play in....

In reply to ClimberEd:

Talking about foreigners climbing harder, I heard that Welsh climbers on a whole are much stronger/better than English climbers, bar a few exceptions....

In reply to tom290483:


My feeling (obviously I may be completely wrong) is that climbers are generally becoming more risk adverse.

In the 1960s you were routinely looking at lobs of 30 feet (often far more). In the 1970s, with basic wires and (late 70s) basic cams, it was more like 20 feet. Nowadays few people want to risk going further than 10 feet - which is perfectly understandable.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ward:


I did Piton route in the Avon Gorge on Monday. I clipped all the pegs in it, and backed most up with a piece of gear. Altogether, I placed about 8 runners in the first 35 metre pitch. My mate placed 5 runners in the second pitch and I placed 5 or 6 in the last.

My mate looked the route up in Classic Rock a couple of nights ago, it was originally done with TWO PEGS!

In reply to Mick Ward:

Perhaps in the 1960s those who couldn't face the thought of a 30-plus-foot fall never climbed at all - maybe the actual number of bold climbers is similar to what it always used to be but as a proportion they're smaller?

In reply to Toreador (and teflonpete):

In a perverse kind of way, it was easier back in the 1960s. You often had to face horrific runouts - there was just no way around it. You didn't know any different. That's what climbing was.

Certainly, in the 1970s, gear got better. But a lot of people I knew led close to their physical limits. It's a bit different leading E4 or E5 when your physical limit is, say, F6c+ than when it's F8a or beyond.

That's what was so remarkable about Seb Grieve. He headpointed pretty close to his physical limit. Serious kudos.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ward:

So most of today's risk-averse climbers just wouldn't have climbed at all back then? Or at the least would have climbed at a much lower grade (which in my case would mean sticking to Diffs!)

In reply to Toreador: I would not be climbing now if protection had not improved. I do not have the "bottle" that I had back then. Older and wiser.

Al

In reply to ClimberEd:

Yes, because your grade says Extreme 4 and something about the technical difficulty. So a big mental block.

Where elsewhere it would simply say it's a 7+ or something and just climb it.

In reply to ClimberEd:

Perhaps there is too much good quality easy climbing in the UK with an interesting history to it. Moving to a country with less rock climbing and considerably less history meant that I simply had up my grade or spend my weekends on the same routes over again. I think to a certain extent you climb what is available; if there is an almost limitless supply of good quality VS climbing, there is less incentive to improve. Alternatively, if you're local crag has one VS warm up route and then the next easiest route is E1, it offers a massive incentive to climb E1.

In reply to ClimberEd:

You have lot's of old climbers and you have lot's of bold climbers, but not so many old and bold climbers. It's self selecting in a Darwinian kind of way

Surely it's a combination of lots of reasons:
* different climbing mind-sets required for trad and sport
* wetter climate in the UK means less outside climbing
* On-sighting mentality vs learning to climb (top-roping, redpointing, working routes)
* Over-use of climbing walls in UK cos the weather is crap, and not learning to climb properly
* More variation in rock types vs predominately limestone in Europe: I know that there are huge variations in the types of limestone but you know what I mean about the huge variety of rock in the UK
* Lack of competitive element in UK climbing as we tend to be keener on our own climbing rather competing. That's just my opinion with no scientific thought behind it!

All of the above can be applied to me before I get a flaming!

I do agree that there is a mental ceiling with the British trad grades. E1 is a scary sounding label. I'm one of those stuck trying to get my head round moving above VS leads. But on the other hand there are 000s of climbs up to VS, especially mountain routes, that I want to do without pushing my limits.

In reply to jacobfinn: I took the liberty of looking at your log book. You could easily onsight E1 within a year if you wanted to. In fact, you may even be able to onsight a carefully picked E2 if you wished to. That's not pie in the sky, it's a fact, but only if you want to.

In reply to ClimberEd: European routes are usually better protected, than the average British climb (lots of bolts every 8 feet) therefore foreign climbers can push their grades on rock within better safety margins.

Also, they invariably have a far better climate, so can climb more days of the year. The foreign climbers coming over here, represent a very small percentage of their respective climbing population.

Continental routes are also much longer, so climbers often develop greater strength and power, because of this.

As for the alps, well considering the average Brit has to travel a thousand miles to get there, and have to usually pack whatever they do into one or two months (a great many 3 weeks or less) I think the British track record in the alps is pretty damn impressive.

And as for a 'just get on with it' attitude. Well when the weather is a bit inclement in the alps, see how many french swiss and italian climbers are out climbing, and how many Brits are - we win hands down.

In reply to MattG:
Looking at your logbook and mine I'd think I could lead E2 no worries and you would be solid on winter grade V/VI i however think things are not always that clear cut when you consider reliability of the onsight on a particular route and willingless to take trad leader falls.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

And this is the answer to the OP's original point. How risk averse we are depends on our willingness to take leader falls.

Me personally, at the moment, not very. If I could get my lead head on, I have no doubt that I could lead a lot harder on trad than I currently do. I've got my first E1 sussed, having top-roped and seconded it. Will I start doing loads of E1s are after I break through the E barrier? Probably not. I just don't think of myself as an E lead climber. I'll have my moments no doubt, but in general I am happy on the VS routes.

In reply to jacobfinn:
whilst I'm bolder in winter than most climbers of my techical ability (sport RP grade) whilst my trad grade is lacking, conversly Matt is the other way around (well atleast in winter). I'm just saying you can't apply a forumale to work this stuff out. My hardest winter ascents have felt far more within my ability than my summer!

In reply to CurlyStevo: I think a lot of it comes down to practice too, I do quite a lot of rock climbing so I'm happy climbing E1 on many several rock types and I'll try some E2's. I do a bit less winter climbing than I'd like to so I'm less good than I'd like to be, though this season's aim is VI for sure, I'll be training and I'm well keen for this year.

In reply to Jacobfinn, if you're happy climbing VS or whatever level then there's no need to climb harder for sure, I was only saying you would be capable, it was more meant as encouragement than me telling you what to do or some such. I only ever moved up a grade as I wanted more challenge and felt I wasn't getting the challenge I wanted on the grade I was climbing.

In reply to MattG:
agreed but I've awlays climbed way more summer than winter, just personally I've felt my winter climbing has been more predicatable for an onsight lead than my summer for my max trad lead grade. Just saying looking at the stats this stuff is not always something you can predict for an individual.

In reply to CurlyStevo: Yeah, that's true, hopefully I can get on more grade V and above this winter though, only done a couple so far but I really enjoyed them

In reply to jacobfinn:

PS I guess you know this but you can't claim an E1 as yr best lead grade until you have osighted it thats how uk trad grade work! So technically you have not broken through the E1 barrier yes your head point lead will have helped but don't kid yourself!

In reply to MattG:
I guess my point was to relieability of the onsight rather than the capibility of the indivifual. That said I feel way more secure pulling on a handle on fat steep ice than HVS grit smearing!

In reply to CurlyStevo: oooh, I'd be the other way round, HVS smear = solo and steep ice = scary, I'm getting better at the ice now though, a couple of winters with decent ice have helped no end

In reply to MattG: zactly!

In reply to ClimberEd:

I'd say on average UK climbers are less risk averse than anywhere (but more risk averse than they used to be) and the majority are difficulty adverse but the elite are just the opposite. The UK has a climbing distribution distorted by the huge number of punters attracted to the brilliant lower grade trad climbing we have.

In reply to Offwidth:

Yes we are more risk averse. Just take a look at the amount of gear hanging from the average leader's harness these days. Double set of rocks,micro wires, double set of cams from 00 to 6, 15 extenders, full set of hexes and 10 slings. All this for a 20m pitch. Yes it's no wonder we can't do hard routes, we can barely get off the ground with all this weight. Then by the time you place all this stuff there's no time for second route.

I try to avoid this but its still too tempting to just take another small cam just in case. It does make routes with rotting pegs and loose rock that bit safer, but moving above gear is increasingly rare to see.

In reply to MattG:

A very refreshing point of view! Too many people want to move up a grade just for the sake of it. So instead of struggling at their limit on HVSs they'll be struggling at their limit on E1s. I can see the attraction of this if you're in the upper Es so improving your grade will place you among the elite, but it's not as if anyone is going to run out of good HVSs to climb!

In reply to DaveAtkinson:

More risk averse than British climbers 50 years ago perhaps, but much bolder than continental types, who would have half a dozen bolts in that pitch

In reply to DaveAtkinson:

Its still comparative: in the US it's not uncommon to see double racks on trad! What's weird is that I think risks increase if you carry too much weight.

In reply to ClimberEd:
Saying the average lead grade in the UK is HS/VS is a bit bit mis-leading. It depends totally on the crag. On grit he average grade will be notably lower because the harder routes above E2/3ish dont get done very often, as they are often bold. On limestone or other rocks that tend ot be steeper and more sustained but less run-out in higher grades, you get more harder routes being done which will pull the average up. However because you can get far more easy grit routes done in a day than hard limestone, mountain or seacliff routes, the average on the logbooks is pulled down.
I suspect if you looked at people who climb at least once a week on average in the UK (ie keen climbers) and looked at their maximum lead grades, average would be HVS/E1, and if you looked at regular lead grades, HVS.

Any comparison with abroad is misleading becaue they only send over their best climbers (at least those in the nes) and they all climb far more on bolts.

In reply to Si dH:
...and of course you also have the phenomenon of people soloing lots of easy rotues, which brings the logbook averages down. IF I look at my logbook graphs for the last 6 years, the averages trad grades given from 2005 to 2011 are:
HS MVS S MVS VS VS HVS

However the grades I was fairly confident leading regularly in that period were more like:
HVS E1 HVS HVS E1 E1 E2

and max lead grade has been E2 every year since 2006 until last week. The average is up to HVS this year not entirely nbecause Ive got a bit better, but also (mostly?) because Ive done very little on grit and so havent been soloing lots of vdiffs.

So what this tells you is that the averages on the logbooks dont really mean much.

In reply to Toreador:


You keep telling yourself that, best not to look at what the Continentals (average climbers, not elite) actually climb when they come over on the annual BMC meets.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Don't worry, I know my place!

In reply to Anonymous:

True story.

So, in conclusion we are mostly crap but having fun, sounds ok to me

In reply to ClimberEd:

I'd say it's simply mental barriers that people set themselves.
I know climbers who have climbed certain grades within a very short amount of time because they didn't realize they shouldn't be able to.

What you THINK you should be able to climb plays a large part in what you end up climbing. I've heard it said that most Brits want to climb F7a for example, where as most French/Spanish/etc climbers aim for F8a.
Not sure how realistic this is but it does seem Brits have a tendency to aim low. Whatever rocks your boat I say; but if you want to be a strong climber don't be held back by those who perceive F7a or even F8a is hard.

In reply to Si dH:

Then again all top lead values get flattered by people choosing routes that suit them. Just try and lead every VS on a crag... most people with best leads upto E2 will struggle.

In reply to Goucho:


You've hit the nail on the head here. It's true that on French crags, Burgundy etc. you need to be confident on 6 or more to get the best out of them.

There aren't many good easier climbs as those that exist are polished as hell - the Saussois is notorious. As the protection is so prevalent, all totally grid bolted, it's the technical and physical ability that is primed, but this doesn't really go along with the notion that climbers here are particularly keen at risk taking, quite the opposite - very few French climbers like unbolted routes, even in the mountains and the efforts at encouraging "Terrain d'aventure", ie. British style "trad" climbing, seems to have completely fizzled out completely.

In reply to Bruce Hooker: Not quite - Ailefroide has seen a resurgance recently - there's hope yet

In reply to ClimberEd: The better the gear the smaller the balls.

Mitch

In reply to MattG:

they may not be elite but would guess they aren't your weekend warriors/ punters either. They are keen enough to to take annual leave/go to anotehr country to climb and 'represent' their country so are going to be in the top half of the normal distribution curve I'd say

In reply to Bruce Hooker: It always used to amuse me to see brits carrying wires on sports routes abroad "in order to reduce the run out"

As for trad climbers, inching their protection above their heads as they ascend. Nuff said.

As to the op - most people are risk averse - you shouldn't confuse people doing bold routes with risk taking - in most cases the risk is well understood and managed.

I can't comment on aversion to difficulty but I'd imagine that is pretty general too.

In reply to ClimberEd:

I'm most definitely risk averse... I like the exercise/movements involved but not the increased chance of failure/injury when pushing the boat out past HVS!

In reply to idiotproof (Buxton MC):

I usually take over half my holiday each year climbing abroad but would put myself well to the bottom of any distribution curve.

In reply to Richard Hession:

Steeper rock, fewer ledges to hit... I'd rather fall off something harder than something easier. Not just for my ego

In reply to ClimberEd:

Interesting that if you look in the sign in books on the towers in Saxony, Brits feature pretty highly after the local Germann contingent.

In reply to MattG:This is of course the obvious answer,i agree...

In reply to ClimberEd:

I thought the whole point of British climbing was being a bit naff?

In reply to ClimberEd: I do think british climbers in general tend towards fear of trad, and so underachieve in that discipline. For example: http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=470720&v=1#x6514124

In reply to James Oswald:

I do wonder about this. If indeed it's true, there must be some huge sample bias, like there's very few decent routes below 6c/7a. So all the punters who'd quite happily be bumbling around of V Diffs (or VS, etc) will be off doing something they can actually do and enjoy (like cycling, walking or running, say). Whereas in the UK we're rather selfishly bringing down the average grade of the nation.

In reply to Dave 88: I don't think this question would have been posted 20 years ago.

There does seem to have been a quiet sea change in attitudes over the last couple of decades.

And the cause of this 'risk averse attitude' (with obvious exceptions) is the opportunities available on sport routes.

20 years ago, trad was all there was, (certainly as far as mainstream) and it was just called climbing. You wanted to climb harder, you climbed harder routes, and the physical developments in strength and stamina and technical ability that were needed, were matched (and had to be)by the requisite developments mentally - if you didn't develop mentally, the physical stuff was academic, unless you wanted to be a permanent second.

Now however, you can develop the physical and technical side of climbing in more or less complete safety on sports routes, without the need to develop the mental side. This creates a mismatch between a climbers physical and technical ability, and their mental ability. So we have climbers who can lead 6c on sport routes, yet crap themselves on a 4c VS, because their isn't a runner already in place every 6 feet to just clip.

Sport climbing has taken away the 'head' part of climbing, and with it the traditional boldness (yet again with impressive exceptions) and ballsey character of British rock climbing.

In reply to Goucho:

...except that the majority of British climbers don't sport climb.

In reply to Anonymous: I find that very hard to believe given the Uk weather and commonality of indoor walls.

In reply to George Ormerod:
I think it's a cultural thing (to some extent).
Is it really a coincidence that Asians perform well at Maths?

If you find this interesting you may enjoy Malcolm Gladwell's Outliers.

In reply to Goucho:


This is an oft-repeated fallacy - most sport climbs are bolder than the trad climbs undertaken by most of the British climbing public. You'll climb closer to your limit on sport and have no choice but to climb above the gear (bolts). Compare this to the mobile top rope provided by modern gear on most trad climbs in the UK.


The British track record of f*cking up and having to be rescued/taking days on routes when the locals do them in hours is pretty impressive, I agree.

In reply to Pagan: "This is an oft-repeated fallacy - most sport climbs are bolder than the trad climbs undertaken by most of the British climbing public. You'll climb closer to your limit on sport and have no choice but to climb above the gear (bolts). Compare this to the mobile top rope provided by modern gear on most trad climbs in the UK. "

Agreed! The common idea that all trad is death and all sport is totally safe is ridiculous. Some sport routes are outright dangerous and some trad routes are awesomely safe.

In reply to ClimberEd:

I've noticed that approaching the VS/HVS boundary you start having to place gear whilst in extremis, whereas on most HS and below you can find a reasonably comfy resting position in which to place gear. Is there a difference between a well-practiced bolt clip and fiddling in a wire when under pressure? I am nervous about having to find, place and then trust gear under time pressure and perhaps others share this fear and stick to VS and below?

In reply to Bobling: It depends where you can rest! There are plenty of rests on many E5s where you can place a healthy nest of gear. Also, the stronger you get, the more places become rests! Hanging on a big jug in steep ground can be a rest on an E4 while it might be the crux of a VS. I think what constitutes a rest depends entirely on perspective. One extreme is standing on a big ledge. Jerry Moffat's famous line: 'I can recover on any hold' is the other!

In reply to jacobjlloyd:


Which dovetailed nicely with Ben's, "[English] 6c isn't that hard any more... and 6b is approaching a rest."

Some years ago, I remember thinking, "Yup, he's right." Don't think that, any more!

Mick (growing old)

In reply to ClimberEd:I was surprised to find as I got older I got bolder !

In reply to Pagan: If you think a sport climb with a bolt every 8 feet is bold, then you're entitled to your opinion of course - even if, like other aspects of your argument, it lacks logic.

In reply to Goucho:

I didn't say it was bold; I said it was bolder than trad climbing as practised by the majority of climbers over here. There's a subtle difference there, you might have missed it while you were avoiding responding to my main point.

Let's work this out though - let's assume for now that we have a sport route with bolts 8 feet apart. You're making a tricky clip with a bit of slack pulled up - so that's 16' fall distance plus slack (call that 4', that's quite a lot but you might be trying to clip over your head) then rope stretch - so you're looking at a 25' fall. I hardly ever see people in a situation where they could fall that far on trad - certainly I've only ever taken falls longer than that a couple of times.

In reply to Pagan: So you're presuming that on a trad route, gear never rips then?

When was the last time you saw a bolt strip out on a fall?

In reply to Pagan:

And when did you last see a potentially dangerous fall on a sport route?

In reply to Goucho:

Well placed gear in good rock is as safe as a bolt to fall on.

I don't think anyone is denying that there are bold/dangerous trad routes, just that the trad=danger and sport=safe equation is incorrect. People make such a fuss about how 'extreme' trad climbing in when really, as long as you're not a muppet, many routes are totally safe. I've taken lobs off quite a lot of trad routes (Regent Street, The Mall, Valkyrie Direct etc etc) with no ill-effects but the idea of slipping off while making the third clip on Consenting Adults scares the hell out of me!

In reply to climbingpixie: Wrong!

Firstly, where as all bolts are more or less the same size, with a similar breaking strain - you can fall 10' onto a bolt, you can fall 30' onto the same bolt, and it will hold - trad gear comes in all shapes and sizes, and all these different sized bits of gear have different breaking stains.

Some will hold a fall from 30', some won't, because they're not designed too, and that is nothing to do with the placement.

The fact is, that on trad routes, the variables are far greater and less predictable than on a sport route.

In reply to climbingpixie: One other thing.

On a sport route, the gears already been placed - all you have to do is clip it - and you know exactly where the next one is.

On a trad route, you have to figure it out and place your own, make sure it's the right one, and make sure it's placed right.

Of course there are bomb proof trad routes - hundreds of them, however the fact is, that while trad = danger is certainly not always the case, sport = danger, is never the case.

In reply to climbingpixie:

I spent a half day hobbling round the Catwalk in March after doing exactly that - I don't recommend it! Counts as about my second or third worst climbing injury, depending on whether you can spraining an ankle scrambling back down to the base of curbar a climbing injury or just pillockry!

And certainly other sport routes bolted old school style can have some sections you wouldn't really want to fall off. I did one this year which had a couple of places where a fall could well have led to injury on ledges, just that it was easy ground so runout.

In reply to Goucho:


For a statement that's basically total bollocks, you make it with such certainty!

In reply to AJM: Be that as it may, I thought that it was still generally the case that sports climbing - particularly outside the UK and particularly for mid-level improving climbers - involves being less worried about falling off (and hence doing a lot more climbing near your technical limit) than general reasonably eclectic trad.

In reply to AJM: When I use the word 'dangerous' regarding climbing, I use it in the context of potential serious injury - you can sprain your ankle falling of a kerb!

So if you can show me a 'sport route' (that's not a climb protected by bolts, they are two completely different things) which is dangerous, then I will happily admit that I'm talking bollocks!

In reply to Goucho:


How big were the RPs that Dave Mac was seen taking 60 footers onto in E11? Wonder what the official breaking strain was on those?!

As for the 'bolts never rip' argument, you could have a chat with Martin Berzins about that one.


On some trad routes this is undoubtedly true. We're talking about the majority of British climbers here - keeping it to the mid-grade majority, most climbers will never find themselves in a really dangerous situation and most of them hardly ever do moves well above the gear in the same way you do on sport routes. I think I can count the number of genuine chop routes I've done on the fingers of one hand (in fact the only one I can think of is probably The Exorcist on Lundy).

In reply to Pagan:

What a ridiculous debate this is.
Yes, there will be a few exceptions, but everyone knows on 99.9% of sports climbs it is very difficult to hurt yourself unless you do something pretty daft, but that a lot more skill and competence is needed to remain safe on the vast majority of trad routes and that some are potentially pretty dangerous.

In reply to Goucho:

As I say, you fall off the wrong bits of some sport routes and you'll really regret it. Take a tumble off some of the easy sections of Living Dead, for example, and you'll either land square on a ledge or bounce off a series of them. It's bolted to protect the cruxes rather than the easy ground, so a tumble in the wrong place would hurt.

Anyway, I'm not sure I've got much more to add to this. There's none so blind as those who don't want to see, and if you refuse to believe that sports climbs can't inflict the occasional serious injury then a trawl of my memories and of the ukc archives (there's at least one lad who died sport climbing in champ is a few years ago, and whilst I can't remember whether it was a sport route or a bolt protected route but there were at the least severe injuries from badly placed bolts in aus a few years back) won't really do anything other than waste my time.

In reply to AJM:

Oh, one last thought, a route I belayed someone on in Seynes a few years back. High first bolt, even higher (too high to be that safe) second bolt, hard moves to reach the second, deckout if you screwed up the clip. Fall onto solid ground from say 25 feet or whatever. Yours right, totally safe.....

In reply to AJM:

That's not a sports route, its a bolted climb. Sports routes are the sub-set of boted climbs where you don't deck in such circumstances.

In reply to Offwidth:

The sport climbers all consider both to be sport routes. Noone would take an E5 tick for Living Dead these days.

It seems ironic that in order to fit the "sport climbing is safe" precondition that it's necessary to exclude (and effectively deem semi-trad?) a number of sport routes because they're too sketchy!

I suppose sport climbing probably is safe if you exclude all the routes where there's potential for injury.

I've never been there, but a French couple I was chatting to in chateauvert in February were very interested in the lipstick I was using - apparently at one of their local crags (St Victoire I think it was) there were some routes where thefirst bolt was maybe 6m off the ground. Are they bolted routes rather than sport climbs too?

In reply to AJM: I've always liked your lipstick as well, Andy.

In reply to John2:

Ali would feel very uneasy if she heard that John. She doesn't know I wear lipstick...

Gotta love my phone and it's autocorrect!

Clipstick in case it wasn't clear!

A

In reply to AJM: that's just bad bolting surely?!

In reply to AJM:

6m starts are what clip-sticks are for. I think some spaced bolt routes are sports climbs if the climbing is easy enough or there is a warning but bad bolting isnt in this group. There are plenty of bolted climbs in the world that are clearly not sports climbs so what is the distinction unless it's you can always fall off from hard moves on a spotrs route in safety?

In reply to tom290483: Most E1-E5 are 'safe', it's just people's perceptions / pre-conceptions that muddy the waters.

In reply to ksjs:

What is your point? All routes are safe as long as you do not fall off. There are absolutely loads of routes of all grades which are not safe to fall off, even if you do place all the protection available.

In reply to AJM:

I think I know the route you mean. A good example of a (rare) badly bolted sport route. It's clearly not a deliberately "sporting" bolted route!

In reply to Pagan: That wasn't a 'sport route'. Please educate yourself as to what a 'sport route' is, because I think you are getting a bit confused.

In reply to AJM:

Sport Route.
Bolt Protected Route.
2 completely different things!

In reply to Robert Durran:

Exactly right. It's not designer danger in any way. It's just assumed that people will tough it out.

Offwidth - I don't think there ever can be a dividing line. There's a fuzzy grey area in here - I think your categorisation of this route versus mine and Roberts shows that.

I think the original post I replied to was saying that sport climbing never equals danger. I think once we consider the routes with high first bolts without a clipstick (and most routes at the catwalk without a clipstick too for that matter - fall off and maybe bounce down towards the beck!), the badly bolted routes and all the huge number of ones which fall into this hazy subset of "maybe sport maybe just bolted" routes then in reality there are routes there which most people would class as sport routes where injury is a definite possibility. And that's without considering the dangers of krabs snapping (rare, but I've done it, and doesn't happen in the same way on wires because of the issue of leverage on the bolt hanger), screwing up typing through at the top or the incredibly rare cases of bolt failure that nevertheless have happened.

I just don't like the lazy idea that you can't hurt yourself sport climbing - in an ideal world you shouldn't do, but then in an ideal world people wouldn't hurt themselves on trad either because you wouldn't fall off the routes that could genuinely hurt you (and as Pagan says genuine chop routes are pretty rare inthe grand scheme of things) and you could safely fall off the ones that wouldn't.

In reply to AJM:

I think you are failing to see the very important distinction between hurting yourself on a sport route which is SUPPOSED to be safe, but turns out not to be due to someone else's bad bolting or equipment failure, and hurting yourself on a trad route because you failed to make the right judgements about protection and then screwed up and fell off.

In reply to Pagan:

You mean the one that snapped?

In reply to Robert Durran:

The post which sparked my reply didn't make any such distinction, so I've not considered it terribly important in my reply.

If god forbid I ever end up in hospital through either cause I'm not sure that saying "it's ok you were just incompetent" or "it's ok it was just a random failure, act of god" would give me much comfort either, it really doesn't seem as important a distinction to me as it appears to be to you.

In reply to Pagan:

I think you make a very good point. Most climbers I know (who are in the majority VS/HVS range) hate taking a fall irrespective whether it is on bolts or gear. The boldness comes from the willingness to take the fall, not on the type of protection.

In reply to Robert Durran: My point is that people's barriers to climbing higher trad grades are in many cases imaginary i.e. you won't kill (or even hurt) yourself, just get on the thing! This assumes some sort of trad skillset / an ability to manage the grades below what you're trying with relative confidence and 'ease'.

In reply to Robert Durran:
Aren't you in Lewis!?

In reply to AJM:

I think all climbing contains risk but for the subset of bolted routes that I'd call sports routes, risk should be minimised so you dont take big falls, or hit the ground (or ledges) from any significant height; anything not like this called a sport route is just badly bolted. It's easy enough to deal with the minor issues you sometimes get on the first two bolts if you use a clip stick (pulling up on the first clip if you need extra reach to clip the second). Thers are also issues with so called 'sports routes' on bad rock, with our desperation to squeeze the most out of the few venues we have in the UK.

As for your trad safety argument the Yosemite accident stats for deaths and serious injuries show just the opposite: people often slip and fall on easier terrain but much more rarely do so closer to their limits.

In reply to PaleMan: What is bold? What grade does it start at? I know the quote isn't meant to be taken literally but you can do some decent numbers in relative safety (and still grow old).

In reply to MattG: Yeah, but 'you' aren't really (having fun). Otherwise there'd be no desire to improve / bemoaning lack of ability / market for better gear / market for coaches or self-improvement etc.

In reply to Dave 88: Genius

In reply to Goucho: This is ridiculous. On most trad there is a healthy amount of redundancy so if something fails something else is there. In most real life trad situations gear never gets loaded anywhere near its rating. In most trad we can assume some degree of competence i.e. when I place a nut I am satisfied with I am exactly that, satisfied; it's not going anywhere!

In reply to Goucho: Suggest you go do some sport climbing...

In reply to ksjs: That of course, is presuming I haven't.

In reply to Goucho:
"Sport Route.
Bolt Protected Route.
2 completely different things!"

Redefining these terms yourself, as you have done in several posts above, is unhelpful.
The meaning of any word is no more or less than its use.

When most people use the word 'Sport route', they dont mean safe, they mean entirely (or mostly) protected by bolts. There are certainly dangerous sport routes out there. Badly bolted sport is still sport. Whether you choose to classify it as such is inconsequential to its consensus meaning.

If we choose to accept your stipulative definitions, then your argument is a simple tautology. But as that is not helpful to the discussion, perhaps we should just stick with what everyone else means by the terms.

In reply to ksjs: I am so glad to be able to wholeheartedly agree with a post! Well said. Its nice to know there are other people out there who trust their gear and get on with it : )

In reply to jacobjlloyd: 1-3 years experience, and you already know it all!

Us inexperienced folk should obviously bow down to your vastly superior experience, and bask with humility and wonder in your erudite words of wisdom.

In reply to Goucho:

You're starting to come across as a bit of a cnut in this debate (that's usually my job) - you've not added a great deal other than to ignore the valid arguments levelled at your points, try and belittle mine and others' experience and shout about how much harder trad climbing is than sport. Did you go to Malham and get your arse kicked or something?

Going back to your original point - you implied that a sport route with bolts 8 feet apart is less bold than the average trad route as climbed by the average punter in the UK. Yes? You can take all the guff about how hard it is to place gear and shove that up your fundament - it's nonsense. Again, talking about the common mass of trad climbs here, placing gear is piss. So, when was the last time you saw the average British climber run it out more than 8 feet above their gear, doing moves with a high chance of falling off or actually taking those sorts of falls regularly? I'll save you the hassle - hardly ever. Most climbers climb with the aforementioned mobile top rope. On sport routes it's commonplace.

In reply to Pagan: Right, shall we start and deal with the facts here!

1) You're opinion as to whether or not I am a cnut, is about as irrelevant as it gets.
2) I did not say trad was harder than sport.
3) I did say that there were more variables regarding protection on trad than sport.
4) Just because a route has bolt protection does not make it a sport climb.
5) I have seen 1000's of people on trad climbs run it out over 8 feet.
6) If you think you can stitch a runner every 8 feet on all trad climbs, then you obviously haven't done much trad - I can give you a list of hundreds of routes for you to go and do if you'd care to challenge that fact.
7) I did not dismiss anyone's opinion, but being lectured to by a 20 year old with 1-3 years experience does raise my hackles.
8) I have never belittled anyone's experience, no matter what grade they climb - climbing routes with big numbers, doesn't make your cock bigger.
9) Your comment about me going to Malham and 'getting my arse kicked' simply demonstrates immaturity - however if I did go, I probably would and wouldn't mind one jot.
10) Most Sport routes are inherently safer than most trad routes of a comparable level of difficulty - I was not comparing an 8c sport route to a HVS trad route!

In reply to Goucho: Many uncontentious points there. But it is possible for a 20 year old with 1-3 years experience to have valuable opinions. Try listening to one someday, you might learn something! Or, with luck, even make some friends...

In reply to Pagan:
>

Its worth pointing out that the RP's in question ripped out the wall almost every time and on other occasions broke completely as far as I can remember. So I think the "official breaking strain" was not disproven in the way you suggest.

In reply to Goucho:


I would just like to quote one of your previous posts in this thread - "1-3 years experience, and you already know it all!

Us inexperienced folk should obviously bow down to your vastly superior experience, and bask with humility and wonder in your erudite words of wisdom."

In reply to jacobjlloyd: There you go again, you just can't help yourself.

I never said that 20 year old's can't have valued opinions, but you tend to present yours in the style of an arrogant lecture.

Your comment above - that even though I'm a 50+ year old, with over 30 years of reasonably substantial (certainly compared to you) climbing experience, could learn something if I listen to you - is yet another example.

Well, there may well be many things I could indeed learn from you, but as it currently stands, climbing isn't one of them.

In reply to 2PointO: If you're gonna go jousting, make sure your lance is big enough

In reply to Goucho:
I am merely pointing out a slight discrepancy with one of your claims, I couldn't be bothered with taking issue with some of the other slightly flawed points for the sake of not wishing to get drawn into an argument, although you seem determined to make that the case looking at the other comments you have posted. And in terms of "jousting" you maybe shouldn't assume that everyone is making a personal attack upon you, it's a very unhealthy outlook.

In reply to 2PointO: I don't think anyone has made any personal attacks on me (I don't consider someone's perfect right to disagree with me a personal attack) and my comment re jousting (aimed at jacobjlloyd) was simply to say that sometimes you have to 'walk the talk' before your comments hold water.

So this weekend, I am off for a couple of days intensive sport climbing - accompanied by a young 25 year old whipper snapping hot shot, who will no doubt make me feel completely inadequate (as he bloody well should at my age) - and if I discover afterwards, that my opinions posted here fail to hold water, I will have no problem in admitting it.

In reply to Goucho:


Yes but most conventional gear is rated to around 12kN and you're exceptionally unlikely to ever subject it to even that much force, let alone greater. Unless I'm placing micro gear I can't say I ever give much thought to the risk of my gear breaking.

I'm not saying that all trad routes are safe - some obviously have poor, spaced or non-existent gear - but that fact tends to be known about them in advance anyway so you can make a decision about the level of risk to undertake based on your ability. An E2 leader soloing Sunset Slab is not really putting themselves in too much danger! The fact is that the biggest risk in climbing is human error, either that of the climber or the belayer, and people can cock up whatever discipline they practice.

Anyway, getting back to the OP - I do think an overly cautious 'trad' mentality and fear of falling/failing are what holds most British climbers back. It's easier to hide behind the facade of how special and 'extreme' trad climbing is than to accept that leading F6a+ on gear isn't really all that impressive and that falling onto gear is probably quite safe, if a little scary. Generally speaking, people (myself included or course) probably just need to man up a bit and try harder.

In reply to Goucho:
If your jousting comment was not aimed at me then my response to it was irrelevant, since you had posted it as a reply to me then I assumed that you were suggesting that I do not have the necessary climbing experience (or something equally ludicrous) to be able to question anything you might say. As you can imagine this seemed like things were descending to a rather unneeded personal level.

In reply to Goucho: In reply to Goucho: You're right Goucho. You thoroughly schooled me, prancing about with that big lance. How do you manage a harness with that thing swinging between your legs? How did you clock up such an impressive climbing CV? You really are a role model. And so eloquent! It must be brilliant to be you.
Of course you cant learn anything from any of us - you already know it all! Thats why you dont bother to listen. I see it now.

Perhaps one day I can aspire to your humility, and take my turn making an arse of myself on the internet.

In reply to jacobjlloyd: Although a man of my age shouldn't rise to the bait, and should probably be setting an example more in keeping with my years, in your case I'll make an exception.

I never said I couldn't learn anything from anyone on here - indeed, there are many people on here I could learn something from, and will be very happy to do so.

However, it isn't you!

In reply to Goucho:


After coming back to climbing after several years out with injury, the thing that I have noticed more than anything else is that all of the 'strong' climbers at the climbing wall all clip above their heads (I guess in the mistaken belief that it is safer) The only waist clippers I have seen have tended to be old timers on easier routes.

In reply to pebbles:

I think it depends on what peer group you fall in with, after an initial few months I discovered Stoney and the crowd of'stars' there, they became friends and peers and people like Jack Street, Geoff Birtles, Chris Jackson became my climbing circle, you couldn't help but climb well.

In reply to ClimberEd:
Random thought, but people who think that we're all stuck on HVS[1] because too much sport climbing has made us completely risk averse might want to review Caroline Ciavaldini's trad career to date...

[1] although personally, I wish I was stuck on HVS...

Perhaps its a product of our government's obsession with health and safety that has created a country of climbers that cannot push themselves beyond what their minds perceive as safe? Any thoughts?.......

In reply to Bri84: Really nothing in life is completely safe. I know personally I always climb best when I embrace the risk and enjoy the excitement rather than attempting to make it completely safe. After all people die top roping and sport climbing!