UKC

I've noticed some climbers are logging climbs as 2nd O/S, Is there such thing???

Can it be an on-sight if you have just watched the leader climb the route, I wouldn't think so.

Thoughts????

In reply to RayG:

I don't keep a logbook, but I understand that's one of the options, and it has a pretty specific meaning (second, clean). I do not see a problem.

In reply to RayG:
I've done numerous climbs on sea cliffs where you can't see the lead climber for significant proportions of the climb. Personally even when i can see the leader for the whole of a pitch i often can't remember the moves he/she made. I log any new climb i do without beta as "onsight" presuming i don't "dog" it.

In reply to RayG:

sometimes it is, sometimes it isnt.

In reply to RayG:

It's a bit wanky and self-aggrandising, a bit like bigging up your first E1 on second, but there's no real harm in it.

In reply to Jamie B:

Speak for yourself. I just use it as a way of noting the first time I climb a route. If I'm seconding and I've not been on the route before, it's second onsight. What would be "wanky" would be getting bothered about what other people logged their routes as in their log books. Goodnight.

In reply to RayG: I always belay with my eyes closed so I can claim the onsight on 2nd

In reply to Jamie B:

On the scale of wank, out of 100:

- Having a public online logbook and logging your onsights = 97

- Having a public online logbook Logging your '2nd onsight's = 98


(I log everything I'm off the wank chart. Infact I'm typing one handed right now)

In reply to RayG:

Hmmm, agreed a bit of a misnomer.


Well that depends on whether you actually saw them, or if it was in your minds eye, before the event occurred. In which case it would be 2nd sight.

In reply to RayG:

Presuming you've approached the climb without prior knowledge other than the guide book description (surely you need this, unless it's a new route) then what else can you log it as?

In reply to RayG:
Climbing isn't like golf, there is no Royal and Ancient to tell you the rules.

What I regard as 'onsight' might not be what you regard as 'onsight'. It doesn't bother me if I see someone else on the climb, because i wont gain much from that, but gear in situ does make it significant difference to me.

However I'm well aware that other people think the other way round. And that therefore "2nd onsight" will be a route where they haven't seen the leader climb, and wish to differentiate between a route when they have had the moves demoed to them.

But at the end of the day your logbook is purely for your own benefit - use whatever termininology you want. I log half of my cycles as "cyclocross" because I want to signify I did them on my hardtail!

In reply to RayG:


That's why I keep MY logbook private, it's for ME.


Interested to know how you'd log a multi-pitch with alternating leads though (only because I'm wondering how ridiculous things can actually get)?

Would you claim the OS as a team, or would you only claim the OS for the pitches that you lead?

In reply to Andrew Wilson:


As I pointed out, there's no harm in it. But I do think that seconding is pretty inconsequential and arguably not worth logging at all.

In reply to Jamie B:

I tend to the view that everything's worth logging, inculding the inconsequential stuff, because my logbook is largely for the benefit of me looking back in a few years and sometimes inconsequential stuff can make me smile or give me a better memory of the day. Sometimes seconding something is enjoyable in its own right, sometimes it's interesting because it was a good lead for a mate or whatever.

Also, this thread has made me realize that for some time I was just anally retentive to want to record a style of ascent for seconding, but not anally retentive enough to care about the difference between 'flash' and 'onsight' as applied to seconding, which is actually a fairly narrow window of anal retentiveness.

In reply to Jamie B:

Now I've heard it all!Basically you are saying if you second a route you've not climbed it.

In reply to Jamie B:

You have logged a few climbs where you have seconded.

In reply to Skip:


Have I? I'd forgotten, it was all a bit inconsequential..

I love the way you're rummaging through my logbook in your desperation to win this non-argument - I had no idea this topic was so meaningful...

In reply to Jamie B:

What DO you sound like. So if you did a 20 pitch route where you swung leads, would you bother or not?

In reply to Jamie B:


You'd better tell Hazel Findlay to get back on Golden Gate then!
http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=64696


"Jack: What are your thoughts on the 'One person does all the leading' style extolled by the Hubers?

Hazel: I guess it's cool if you want something to be entirely your own achievement. But for me, climbing has always been about other people as well, about working in a team. The fact is that, unless you are free or aid soloing, you have to work as a team anyway, so why not share the experience and share the free climbing. Also, a lot of the pitches on granite are safe and not very bold, so it doesn't really make much difference to the difficulty if you are leading or seconding. On the Golden Gate, the crux pitches are mostly either bolted. downclimbs or traverses, so in those cases it really didn't make a difference. And we both lead the Golden Desert pitch, which is more trad style."

In reply to RayG: My belayer had his eyes open, but opened a packet of crisps at the crux, can he still claim onsight if he dint see the hardest bit? He was too ethically pure, so he wrote "flashed" in his logbook instead, even though he's a midget and had to do five small smeary step ups and undercut the poor side of a mega-jug and intermediate a double sloper to reach the crimp that i could pop to. Horses for courses really, I'd already seconded the route but called it an onsight coz it was the first time id done it on lead, different ballgame that.

In reply to RayG:

And who cares? Daft category a second is a second.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Exactly.

In reply to Jamie B:

I'm a VS punter, fast on my way to becoming a HS punter, so there's arguably no point in my logging anything. I do so as a record to myself of what I've climbed, and since my memory's bad, that includes what I've seconded (so I don't end up thinking I'm onsighting it later).

I keep my logbook public, as there's no reason not to, and it might perhaps be of use to others. Though the occasional thread such as this sometimes makes be wonder

In reply to Bulls Crack:

Obviously the person logging it cares. In my case this is to differentiate between a route I've climbed before and one that I haven't.

Why should this matter to you?

In reply to Jamie B:

I had no idea this topic was so meaningful...

It isn't, so why did you start it?

And I'm still waiting to hear how you'd log a multi-pitch with alternating leads...

In reply to RayG:

Leading a route, following chalked holds and claiming it as onsight is more questionable

In reply to Jamie B:


Hardly. It could simply be a way of denoting it was done 'clean' in one go. Different people use their logbooks differently, there's no standard and we're each free to choose how we record what we do.

jk

In reply to Toreador:

It doesn't!

The first time I seconded an E1 was meaningful to me as I was only leading HS at the time and I logged it so I knew that I seconded it, and who I seconded it with. It is nice to see how many climbs you do in total and how many you are seconding and how many you are leading. The full picture gives you a better idea of how your climbing is progressing in general.

In reply to Milesy:

Surely you don't second an E1, you second a 5a/5b/5c? The E-grade is for the (onsight) lead.

In reply to Jamie B:

Semantics Jamie. You know what I mean. The log book doesn't have that facility and of course I mean seconding my first 5b if we are talking about the standard tech grade so that's why every log entry is useful to me. I have recently been doing a fair bit of seconding above my leading grade which has allowed me to push my lead grade higher.

In reply to Jamie B: The grade is of the climb, this has nothing to do with the style you have climbed it, the way you climb it only affects your experience of the climb, it doesn't morph the rock into something else. Being, also, that e-grade is not only abuot protection but sustainedness and other factors you cannot automatically assume it is irrelevent for a second. Plus seconding a travesing climb can be a hard on the second as the lead, at least on the lead you can see how good the relevant piece of gear is.

In reply to RayG: I will log my climbs according to how I think is relevant at the time. A friend and I often ab and strip single pitch tuff so we cen both lead it. If he gives me hints, tips or advice or I see excatly how to do the moves or crux I would log as with Beta, if not it would be onsight.
Seconding, I will log as onsight if I learnt nothing from watching my partner climb it. The fact that I log it as seconded takes care of explaining that I did not lead it.

My log book is a record for me of the climbs I hvae done, the style I have done them in and with a note also. It is public but it is not there for anyone's benefit but mine.


A bigger question is why the hell do you care if someone logs second onsight. Alos search the forum this comes up about evry six months.

In reply to puppythedog:


It's also quite useful to your UKC peers when they are looking for something to flame you with.

In reply to RayG: If i second something and don't fall off then i count it as O/S.

I think seconding on routes well above your lead grade is beneficial to your own climbing, it allows you to get really good technique in a safe situation but still offers a challenge. Obviously its no good for the head game but that can be worked on in its own time.

For someone who leads Severe, i was mighty happy when i seconded my first E1 (5b) and didn't fall off.

In reply to RayG:

I quite often log routes i have seconded and am not capable of leading myself, why not? I don't think i would log it as an O/S but so what, get a life and start worrying about things worth worrying about!!!!

In reply to Wesley Orvis:

I've supposedly seconded E4, but it's meaningless. One bottom-end 5c move and if the leader had opted to use a side-runner it would have been E1.

In reply to Jamie B:

Fair point, but i think it's more to do with remembering what and when you have done, well for me it is anyways, as when i can lead that grade i will go back and do the routes i have seconded first, as i know were the runners and belays are, making it slightly easier and getting me more confident at the grade.

In reply to Jamie B:

That is clearly the exception.

Hypothetically, What about a multi pitch with crap gear and a crap belay? Surely the overall grade is important to the second where falling off could be as serious as the leader falling off?

In reply to Milesy: traversing as a second can be just as Hairy as on lead

In reply to Jamie B:
Yeah, it does seem a bit weird when people get excited about seconding a new adjectival grade. Eg when someone tells you they seconded their first HVS at Froggat today, it sort of makes a difference whether it was Sunset Slab or Chequers Crack...

In reply to Ramblin dave: As you point out it makes a difference what they climb, it's quite reasonable then for people to be excited in some circumstances?

In reply to Jamie B: What E4 had a bottom end 5c move in it? I just want to know because it might be an easy grade jump

In reply to puppythedog:

The Brush Off?!

jcm

In reply to puppythedog:
Yeah, I've been pleased to get something clean on a second plenty of times. Or even in some cases to dog it horribly on a second. It's a different challenge from a clean onsight lead, and to me it's normally a lot less exciting or memorable, but it can still be a struggle that sticks in your mind and a challenge that you're happy to have overcome.

It's just the interest in adjectival grades in this case that seems a bit clueless.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: Found it, what's the landing like?

In reply to puppythedog:

Penetrative, as I recall. If you miss the pointy tree stump, then not too bad as these things go.

jcm

In reply to RayG:

Yes, I think a 2nd can be on sight. You're still having to figure out the moves on rock you've not climbed before and holds you've never seen before. Although, I suppose if the leader gives you a constant stream of beta then maybe it wouldn't be o/s.

I don't usually bother recording o/s for my 2nds because I don't think it's as important as the leads.

In reply to Milesy:

To be fair this is just as much the exception as Jamie's example, if not more so.

In reply to RayG: I'm more with Jamie on this. You can lead onsight, but a second is 'just' a second, either 'clean' or 'dogged/with rests etc'. Onsight implies a lead for me.

In reply to puppythedog:

It's an arête. The ground on the left side is much higher, so people often pad that out and try and land that side, tricky for the top moves. If you landed right side, its not terrible from memory, just a f*cking long way. Landing with one leg on either side would be a train crash. It's still a complete steal at E4 though.

In reply to Jonny2vests:

Oh, really? Maybe someone has cleared away the pointy tree-trunk.

I recall some piece of gear in which my mates had great confidence, though I didn't. Basically though a steal, as you say.

jcm

In reply to ChrisBrooke:

If you log it like this, how do you know whether it is your first time seconding the route or a subsequent time?

In reply to RayG:

I do just because, who really cares what style I seconded, it's pretty much tr anyway.

In reply to Wesley Orvis:

Some interesting replies with the exception of Mr Orvis who seems to have taken it a little too seriously.

In reply to Wesley Orvis:


Nowt wrong with that, done it myself. But it's still a subtle form of working, so it doesn't really earn you the grade..

In reply to RayG:

What you really want to be investigating is the insidious 'Solo dog'.

In reply to Andy Moles:

I used to have a dog called Solo.
When it died we got another one, called Dyno.

I did a new route in Joshua Tree and called it Solo Dog, partly after our dear departed hound and also because I'd top-roped it before doing the first ascent solo. It was later retro-bolted I believe.

In reply to john arran:

With all respect to the late Solo, I hope you didn't log it.

In reply to RayG:

I haven't taken anything too serious mate so shut it.

In reply to Jamie B:

Yes as a pretty shit climber who mainly does mountain routes and who has come into climbing through fell walking and scrambling, for me, it's just about getting into some beautiful positions in the hills and getting an adrenaline boost and most nice lines, ridges and great rock architecture are high up on crags were I may need to climb harder to get there.

In reply to Wesley Orvis:

"I haven't taken anything too serious mate so shut it."

It seems my friend Mr Orvis is what is known as a troll, there was once a climbing brand named Troll too

In reply to RayG:

Your the troll mate sending threats via email from an imaginary name, like i said above you need to get a life.......

In reply to Jamie B:

Have you ever seconded 1st pitch White Slab or numerous other terrifying traverse pitches.

In reply to RayG: personally I only record new leads, boulders or solos. I never record seconding, dogging or repeats... for me they don't count.

In reply to JIMBO:

Same here - it makes for great-looking graphs!

why do you give a shit?

In reply to RayG:

Since first starting on UKC i have had a number of threats, your email is now the third threatening email i have received it really is quite laughable how many key board tough guys are on these forums.

In reply to Wesley Orvis:

You can be a little belligerent yourself, there may be a connection.

But threatening emails are a step too far. I received a string of them a few years ago, which prompted me to talk to the police. UKC were very supportive and banned the perpetrator, you should maybe have the same conversation?

The incident did however prompt me to re-evaluate my posting style, which was a good thing.

An interesting point made earlier about alternating leads. For a long time now I only record the ascent as I 'climbed' the route if I lead the crux pitch.
As has been mentioned a few times - the log book records what you want it to record for whatever reasons you have.

In reply to JIMBO:


To remind me what I've climbed and track my progress.

In reply to Jamie B:


Maybe, but I do like to think anything I say on here I would also say quite happily to that persons face, I am on here under my real name and I only say it how it is, rather than sending petty threats under a fake profile.

I would say i am rather "frank" over "belligerent"

To me this is the saddest thing about this forum you can't have a difference of opinon from the general UKC consesus without some pathetic moron sending threats via private email.

In reply to RayG:

So what if you are switching leads on multi-pitch? By your rules, surely you could argue that it's not an 'onsight' either as you've still second'ed half the route and therefore still a degree of beta? Personally I've always logged climbs on 2nd as onsight if a FA for me unless some clear beta has been offered up by my partner. Half the time I climb routes in a different manner to my partner anyway. A few weeks ago I bridged a route on second that my partner primarily jammed and back-and-footed so what would you class that as?

In reply to Mr. Lee: I'm still waiting for an answer to that very question, asked at 23:41 on Sunday....

In reply to Mr. Lee:
Is there a difference between back and footing and bridging?

In reply to deacondeacon:

Are you serious?

'Back-and-footing': Using my 'back' and my 'feet'. i.e my back is against one wall. i.e 'back' and 'foot'.
'Bridging': As in my feet are 'bridged'... like a bridge.

In reply to RayG:


It's a worthless classification.

In reply to deacondeacon:

Well one is back and footing, the other is bridging!