UKC

Ok, so yes, this has been done many times before but as it seems to be constantly evolving i was wondering what is currently the most common grading for short routes (5 or 6 metres) set amoungst standard sized routes.

Ta.

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

I think it depends how you climb them. If you use pad then a V grade, if you solo or lead it then just a uk tech grade like you did for the yat guide, worked well.

In reply to Dave 88:

yeah thats what thought, unless it is a dedicated bouldering venue

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

Or further to Dave88's comment, maye how most people are likely to climb it, rather than just how you climb it? Not always obvious though I suppose.

In reply to Southern Man:

yeah its not obvious if its not a dedicated bouldering venue.

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

If it has gear that would actually be of use then grade it as if it were to be lead, if there is no gear then a boulder grade and just treat it as a highball?

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King: If it's a trad venue I think a trad grade is probably more appropriate, perhaps with a mention of a bouldering grade in the description.

In reply to Southern Man:

I was referring to how the FA climbed it. But you're right, like on grit, many of the short routes now getting re-graded with a V grade, as that's the style most people climb them now.

I prefer a uk tech grade myself, but I realise I'm a bit out of step there.

If you're developing a new crag (which I'm assuming you are) might also be worth grading them as boulder problems, simply to encourage a bit of traffic, seeing as how it's so popular at the moment.

In reply to Dave 88:
>

God no, the boulderers will trash the place!

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

and i see stuff like Pedlar's Slab, Punklet, Greengrocer wall etc at Stanage still seem to happily get trad grades although they are short bouldery solos.

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

If there's gear then a trad grade. If there isn't then it's just a solo so just give it a tech grade and mention a pad might be useful.

At the end of the day trad grades apply when you're racking up and placing gear. If you're doing a micro-route with no gear, or treating it as a highball problem then it is essentially soloing a route. Then the technical aspect of the route will be the only thing thats important because you can't really afford to fall off.

Unless you want to go for a grading system based on the likeliness of dying from a highball/microroute fall (may I suggest grading in micromorts if that is the case http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micromort ) even a grading system based on the softness of the landing zone and the amount of pads and spotter you use (either compressive strenght of the floor on a dry day, or the rebound strenght, or a conbination of the two. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressive_strength & http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeb_rebound_hardness_test ).

Yes, it has been a long and boring day at work for me.

In reply to mlmatt:


Thats not the case though is it. you can still grade a solo, depending where the crux is. California Arete is a solo but gets E1.

In reply to mlmatt:

You could do but that still doesn't tell you where the hard move is whereas a combined grade might give a clue

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

California Arete is graded 4c for a solo. It's graded E1 if you lead it and because if you lead it someone will have to second it, I wouldn't want to fall off California arete seconding. That wouldn't be a fun experience.

In reply to Bulls Crack:

I do take you're point but then again if you're soloing (and therefore falling off isn't an option) would it matter where the crux is?

I know that might come across as pedantic but the less you know about the line, the purer the ascent right?

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

For borderline routes give both a trad grade (adjectival and technical) and a V grade. No reason not to.

In reply to mlmatt:


But the whole point of a guide is to give such information; if you don't want it you can leave the guide at home.

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

I think the BMC guides have done a good job on this, giving all sorts of silly combinations of grades like V2 (E2 6a) and E3 6b (highball V4) depending on whether it's more bouldery or more traddy.

I just think that everyone's standards are a bit different when it comes to what's a good little highball rather than a dangerous solo, so it pays to have a variety of information.

For example, I think that Pedlar's Slab, Arete and Rib are all great solos, but Punklet is a good lead (I have soloed it, the easier way, and was very scarey). You can't tell be the grades, particularly.

In reply to mlmatt: Someone who can only climb tech 5b might consider soloing a route with a tech 5b move off the ground followed by 4a climbing to the top, but they'd probably think twice if it was 5b all the way up.

I guess the really completist option is to give it a trad grade and tech grade for the soloing and mention the trad grade for leading it with gear in the description ("graded for the solo - if you can be bothered to rope up, gear in the crack reduces the grade to S"), or vice versa.

In reply to Coel Hellier:

But given that we're discussing giving grades to routes that are more likely to be soloed, surely the actual route description will tell you where to crux is?

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

Maybe it's easier to top-rope the route before hand, then you'll know the score before you go for the big solo?

I mean, thats basically what we're getting at here arn't we? We're trying to find a grading system as good as the British adjective/tech system that'll apply to soloable routes.

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King:

There is none. I favour the system described by Jon (being BMC odd that eh ?. Expanding what he said it depends a lot on the landing and the gear.

In reply to Formerly Known as Pylon King: Mark - have a look at page 12 of the CC guidebook for the Sandstone outcrops of F of D. GZP or MC might be able to explain it to you.

In reply to mlmatt:

That is just not the case. There is no difference in the grade for a lead or a solo. and routes are never given an adjectival grade for seconding them!

In regards to the original question - I hate seeing just a tech grade as it tells you nothing about the route apart from how hard one particular move is. I would prefer a bouldering grade if the landing is good enough, otherwise a proper UK grade, acknowledging that it is a solo in the text.

In reply to TraceyR:

Yes i am aware of that but it is just Martin's grading for headpointing in the FOD and it doesnt necessarily apply elsewhere