UKC

Just curious ...

In reply to kingholmesy:

Best guess is somewhere between 1 and 1 million.

In reply to kingholmesy:

Why don't you ask them?

Mick

In reply to kingholmesy:

Just over 1700.

In reply to Iain Peters:

I was close

In reply to The Pylon King:

You were accurate, just not very precise :P

In reply to andrewmcleod:

A difference often overlooked by those who also don't understand the difference between correlation and causation

In reply to James Jackson:

What percentage of those are eligible for a bus pass?

Just curious...

In reply to Double Knee Bar:
Well here's one!
But I have been in for 42 years.

In reply to Double Knee Bar:

...and another...me. There's a few of us still bumbling along on our zimmers: Littlejohn, Dunne, Fowler for example. We've even let a few young 'uns in such as Alan James of this parish. You obviously haven't heard that 60+ is the new 20+ and 20+ is the new 5+. Are you one of these by any chance? Just curious...

In reply to Double Knee Bar:

Not me I'm CC and still have years to go before I'm up for a free bus pass! Unlike the 2 previous grumpy old men...

In reply to Iain Peters:


Do I qualify still as a "young 'un"? Not sure my kids would agree and I do have the big half-century birthday fast approaching!

Alan

In reply to Iain Peters:


Yup, 24

In reply to Iain Peters:


Bloody hell. What sort of E grade would that equate to?

In reply to kingholmesy:

Just been let in as a thirty one year old. Not sure they new that when they said yes though

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:



Wet behind the ears youth. The trouble with letting young whippersnappers like you, Bald Eagle and puppythedog in is that none of you show any respect for our august institution. It was a black day when they let the women in, opened the floodgates and all that. Good god I've even seen CC members climbing V Diffs and as for chalk and bolts......

In reply to Iain Peters:


Good God! I'd never noticed. I shall be writing to the secretary to tender my resignation immediately.

In reply to kingholmesy:

To be serious for a moment: undoubtedly the age demographic of the bigger national clubs is rising. Bound to really because we're all living beyond our four score years and ten (hopefully) but also remaining reasonably active. I'm pretty certain that if one was to compile a list of 50+ old climbers still operating in the E grades and 7s/8s sport it would be a fairly lengthy one. The CC does need younger members, and some of its well-trenched attitudes are changing and will continue to change and they are the ones who can speed this process up, whatever grumpy old farts like myself might think.

In reply to Iain Peters:

Ah but how many are having fun?

In reply to Bulls Crack:


Judging by the stories I hear, quite a few and they should be ashamed of themselves!

In reply to kingholmesy:

Contemplated joining a while back, but the old Groucho Marx principle had to be upheld:

"I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member".

In reply to The Ivanator:

So far all of my interactions with the club, whilst trying to join, whilst at an aspirant's meet, since I joined and trying to participate have been very positive.

In reply to puppythedog:

Whats an Aspirants meet when its at home?

In reply to Choss:

A meeting for people who aspire to join the club perhaps?

In reply to dunnyg:

Sounds a bit Victorian.

Sorry old chap, Carruthers blackballed you, youre out.

:-D

In reply to Choss:




Far from it, just a clumsy term allowing those considering joining the club a chance to meet up and climb with members. It's called the Climbers' Club because that's what we do and although there's usually a strong social element to meets and the like, climbing is what it's about. This year there are meets on Pabbay, the Italian Alps, Morocco, a two week family meet in Cornwall that's always oversubscribed and a host of others across the UK. The whole joining protocol has been simplified and you can even join at 16.

In reply to Iain Peters:

I joined at the beginning of last year, it was fairly straightforward and I don't know why I didn't do it sooner. As Iain says, climbing is what the club is about and I've met some great people I doubt I'd have met any other way.

In reply to Choss:

Nothing wrong with Victorian. Carruthers is a very good judge of character. He's probably got your mark already. Sceptics and cynics need not apply.

In reply to kingholmesy:

I think that they were not calling it an Aspirant's meet when I went but that is what they used to call it and it described me well. I aspired to join. If you may want to join the club it's not difficult.

In reply to Choss:

See my comment above.

In reply to kingholmesy:

The CC is a big club with 1700 members and yet, with the exception of Ynys in the Pass, its many excellent huts are significantly under-used. I think that this may be because a good proportion of members are not that active. The member profile is also top heavy at the older end of the age range and women are under-represented. Personally I don't think this is a healthy state of affairs for the club.

As a member edging towards old fart-dom myself I would like to see applications from younger climbers and women encouraged much more actively. I also think the club would benefit a membership nearer the 3000 mark.

There are some quite simple things we could do towards this end such as
- advertising the fact that we actually want new members
- making it much easier for people to actually join the club (do we really need aspirants meets and nominations supported by existing members, who are we trying to keep out?)
and
- going back to the days when University and college climbing clubs were welcome guests in our huts.

Lights touch paper and stands back.

In reply to colin struthers:


Non-climbers? Other undesirables? As Iain said, the club is about climbing and that is it's strength; when I go to a hut I know that I shall be in the congenial company of other rounded climbers. Actually, when I support a membership application, the most important question I ask myself is whether it is someone I would be happy to share a hut with. But yes,the club should probably do more to attract more young, active climbers.

In reply to kingholmesy:
I'm 32 so one of the young guns but there are plenty of much older members who climb harder than me!

It's a great club for the huts, the meets and the climbing partners and just random people you meet, who are generally interesting and fun people. I'd urge every active and experienced climber to join.

Now pass the port, would you?

In reply to Robert Durran:

When I climbed a lot of actively than now, I never considered joining the CC as it always seemed a club very based in England & Wales & I was in Scotland (likewise I'd never have considered trying to join the FRCC with its Lakes focus) - is this still the case?

In reply to Doug:


No

In reply to Doug:

As far as I can tell the focus can be driven by members so if you joined and wanted more scottish meets you could organise some.

In reply to colin struthers:

- - would like to see applications from younger climbers and women encouraged much more actively.

I agree wholeheartedly


Agreed, but I feel the perceived difficulty in joining is something of a myth. Having said which we should work hard to dispel the myth in order to achieve your listed aims. I'd like to see the retention of membership via meets (but surely we can think of a less off-putting adjective than "aspirants") and/or existing member's approval. See my next contribution (below) for the rationale in this

- - who are we trying to keep out?)

I understand the original membership criteria included ability to lead VS (on mountain crags) in order that any member meeting any member can instantly strike up a partnership confident that their new chum knows the ropes, so to speak. So the answer to your question is that we're trying to keep out the uninitiated and the incompetent. That's fine by me.

In reply to colin struthers:


Aren't the CC trying to keep none climbers out?

One thing that I have found with local clubs, who have no criteria about who joins, is that the climbing often goes by the wayside. People who can and want to climb usually have climbing mates and can just go off and climb with them. People who have not climbed much, who tend to walk, or mountainbike, or prefer to shop, or go to a cafe, or have social events such as skittles evenings can end up dominating. If experienced members do attend meets, it can end up with the experience of belaying multiple none climbers up easy routes, which is enjoyable and fun now and again but an off putting experience if it is repeated often enough and isn't appreciated (do I sound bitter?)

To have a successful club of any sort includes both looking after the interests of existing members, so that you retain them, as well as encouraging new members who have the qualities that will add something to the club.

One impressive thing about the cc is that it is about climbing and although people will do other outdoor activities, climbing is still seen as the main purpose of the club and the main interest of those in it. It is a really good way to meet other climbers who are experienced and who don't need looking after.

I've never heard any complaints about the joining procedure, apart from those who haven't actually tried to join and who have never met any members. I've heard a lot of people praising the system and saying that for them it was a welcoming, encouraging and enjoyable process.

In reply to tlm:

I've be a CC member for a few years now and I think it's great to be a member of a national club that actively puts something back into climbing. The various huts are handy too and I've met a whole bunch of interesting people through the Club. As regards membership I'm surprised at the numbers quoted here, I would have thought it to be more. The membership procedure has been greatly simplified recently and I hope more climbers are encouraged to join.

That's not what I found. I found it to be quite eye opening as to the old-fashioned narrow mindedness of the people at the top. The aspirants meet put me off joining.

In reply to Double Knee Bar:

Did you go on an Aspirants meet or was it just the thought of one that put you off? I went on one last year. It was a good weekend, I went climbing for 2 days, ate and drank a great meal for free on the Saturday night and met some nice people. All in all a great weekend, I admit to that I was dubious about the whole aspirants meet idea but I was way off the mark.

I think the aspirants meet this summer is in the Pass, no doubt it'll be another great weekend. They tend to fill fast I believe so if you're wanting to go I'd get in touch with the organisers sooner rather than late.

Hope that goes some way to clearing up any misconceptions.

Sam - (CC member, at last!)

In reply to Sheffield Sam:
sorry my post wasn't clear. Yes I went to an aspirants meet and was put off by it.
There are some great folk IN the Climber's Club, but I think the old fashioned attitudes of a few of the members at the top really put me off the whole idea.

In reply to Doug:


No, we even have a Scottish hut now (and one in The Lakes).

In reply to Double Knee Bar:


That's a pity. I went on an aspirants' meet about 20 years ago. It was superbly organised in a quiet, low-key way, i.e. things worked very efficiently but there was never a sense that you were being shepherded around - you weren't.

I'd had dealings with the CC some 20 years before that and, sadly, encountered some tossers. But you always get the odd tosser everywhere and anyway, that was then. Both on the aspirants' meet and staying at Ynys since (as a guest) I was pleasantly surprised.

I've never applied to join but that's my own quixotic fault, not anything to do with the CC.

Mick

In reply to Double Knee Bar:


You have a valid point. There has always been an element of old-fashioned, narrow-minded elitism within the CC (and to be fair, you'll find that in any large group... UKC included) but it is far less influential these days. I've been closely involved with the Club for virtually all my life through my family, and can remember as a youngster sitting in the Everest Room of the PyG with the "good and the great" of the establishment listening to them complaining about the antics of Brown, Whillans and the like. In fact despite family pressure I refused to join until women were admitted and, shock horror, even allowed inside some of our huts! That change largely came about because a younger generation of top climbers joined and demanded it.

Those attitudes are changing fast, often as a result of old codgers like Colin Struthers, (Hi Col, I've located your bolts, you wicked man!) sticking their heads above the parapet and comments like your own. Some of those changes are already happening, and more will follow if active younger climbers get involved.

In reply to Double Knee Bar:



Seriously, what do you mean by old-fashioned attitudes? I know CH is a unconscionable prat but keeps himself to himself when in huts.

In reply to Iain Peters:

In fact despite family pressure I refused to join until women were admitted and, shock horror, even allowed inside some of our huts! That change largely came about because a younger generation of top climbers joined and demanded it.

That committee that passed the women acceptance had Paul Nunn, Ken Wilson, Dave Pearce, Dave Cook and me on it, socialists to a man

In reply to Mike Highbury:

I remember staying at the frogatt hut in 2013 as a guest and being put off joining by one pratt who was using the hut as his own personal fief.

Just because his daughter was in a swimming competition and up early everybody had to be in bed and quiet by 8.......

In reply to Double Knee Bar:

There's been a lot of change on the main committee in the last couple of years so I don't think that's the case any longer. Why not come along to the prospective members meet in the Pass in June to see if you get a better impression?

In reply to Al Evans:


Ken once told me that the thing he was proudest of was being on that committee and helping to allow women to join the CC.

Mick

In reply to kingholmesy:

Im Struggling to Understand why a Sport/activity club today isnt just open to all to join. Its an Anachronism.

In reply to kingholmesy:

I am a long standing member (30 years at a guess) and I initially joined because of the excellent hut network. As it turned out I stopped using the huts, especially at weekends, for a number of reasons, chiefly because when the weather was good they were rammed to the rafters.
Also there were a couple of occasions when large student groups turned up and and took over the place.

Chris

In reply to Choss:

I'm not in the CC and I am in two clubs with no membership requirements beyond the ability to write your name on a form, but I can understand the thinking - it's an appealing idea to be able to go on a trip, meet someone in the hut, and know that you could go out climbing with them the next day without worrying that they'll be horribly unsafe. Or to not have to worry when you plan a trip that half the people signing up might need teaching how to tie in before you can do any actual climbing.

In reply to Choss:

Ah but you see the Climbers' Club is open to all --- climbers --- that's not an anachronism, the clue's in the name

In reply to Choss:

Anyone can join (over 16 years old). Anyone can apply (needing two referees) and if you don't have two referees you can get some by turning up to the meets organised so that you can meet people. Why would anyone want to join a club if they haven't met anyone in it?

In reply to the thread:


... that there are no spaces in the hut because they're all taken by people going walking, bird watching, mountain biking, photographing, geology field trips, et cetera. Nothing wrong with any of those of course, except that the CC wants to be a climbing club.

The qualifications for the CC amount basically to this: Are you a climber with a long-term interest in climbing? Are you basically competent with a modicum of experience of a range of climbing?

In reply to Choss:
The CC just asks that your a competent climber, and to assess this asks that you can lead a Multi Pitch about VS ish and that your a keen climber, hardly a demanding criteria.

Any club that has me in it I can assure you is not elitist.

A little story.
I was unpacking my stuff at the Grange Hut 7 ish one evening and a chap I had never met before asked me if I wanted to climb.
What now says I, I`m just about to cook my tea
He says "are you here to cook or climb"
fair enough and 30 minutes later we are on Mandrake on Quay foot buttress.
That is why a certain competence is required, so that you can safely climb with any other member.

I have not met one Arsey person in the CC.

In reply to kingholmesy:

There is little doubt in my mind that at one time it was elitist. It was very difficult to get in if you were working class and/or female. It was full of stuffy, ex-Oxbridge, Gentleman types who had very traditional attitudes but that is not the case at all these days. Anyone can join and the club is better for it.

In reply to Choss:


As others have said, the clue's in the name of the club.

Also, to filter out idiots who would be antisocial in huts or not look after them.

In reply to GLUF:

Is it still fair to say that you have to be a competent _trad_ climber? (ignoring the stuff on the CC website about some 'adventurous' sports routes in other countries).

The website at least suggests that boulderers, indoor climbers, sports climbers and single pitch climbers will not be accepted. This may of course be untrue...

In reply to GLUF:

why should people Climbing Below a certain Grade be excluded. Theyre still Climbers. It does Sound a tad Elitist by that entry Standard?

In reply to andrewmcleod:


Yes.


Yes, true, if that's all you've done. You need to be basically competent with a degree of experience of a range of climbing, which means multi-pitch sea-cliff and/or mountain routes at about VS-ish. You could still be primarily a boulderer or sports climber, so long as you would be competent to do something like Dream of White Horses.

In reply to Choss:


The idea is simply that anyone basically competent and committed to climbing will cope with VS multi-pitch without difficulty these days. With modern protection and footwear and with walls to train on VS is hardly an "elite" grade.

In reply to Coel Hellier:

That's not a range though, it's a particular type. You could have never done anything except sea cliff trad and be accepted, or could climb 8a sport, E6 in the Peak, and F8a bouldering, and not be accepted.

On the plus side I would not be accepted (Groucho Marx principle), having only done a few VS multipitch routes on non-mountainous, non-sea cliff crags :P (if you exclude the single pitch HS ridiculous schist sea stack!)

In reply to andrewmcleod:

Well as I`m a first and foremost a Trad climber never thought about it, but is not the Clubs aims to support Trad climbing, though we do have bouldering weekends and sports climbing trips and the like.
I suppose it`s like saying why do cricket clubs not have golfers in, it`s hitting a ball with a stick, or football clubs ask that you play football and not turn up with a Rugby Ball.
If sports climbers had a club I`m sure I would be welcome so long as I sports climbed but I could hardly expect to join and then they start trad climbing, could I?

In reply to Coel Hellier:


I disagree with that. Many many Good competent committed Climbers Climb Below VS, and for whom Leading multiPitch routes like Dream of White horses would be well out of their Reach.

In reply to andrewmcleod:

Looking at their website, they've actually dropped the explicit minimum grade anyway - they just emphasise "adventurous" climbing.

In reply to Choss:

Well that's part of life, I`m sure they`ll get over it.

In reply to GridNorth:


You are talking at least 60 years ago, I was invited to join in 1972 and already the mix of the club was equally Oxbridge (which I certainly was not) and working class (which I certainly was) in a couple of years I was on the commitee and women were allowed to join, it was only a few years later that we had our first woman president.

In reply to GLUF:


Assuming thats in response to:

why should people Climbing Below a certain Grade be excluded. Theyre still Climbers. It does Sound a tad Elitist by that entry Standard?

Sort of doesnt help your not Elitist argument very much?

In reply to Choss:


What I think you mean is:

I disagree with that. Many many Good competent committed Climbers Climb below <a grade I can't climb>, and for whom Leading multi pitch routes like <a route too hard for me> would be well out of their Reach.

Which is just tough I suppose

In reply to Choss:
Absolutely agree and I've argued on this point both inside and outside the committee. If the rule applies to those wanting to join, then it should also apply to those members who can no longer climb the stairs let alone a route.

In answer to andrewmacleod: the website is currently being completely revamped and I trust all old school definitions of who is or isn't a "climber" will be deleted. Climbing doesn't need the Climbers' Club nearly as much as the CC needs climbing!

Al and Mick. Movers and shakers all; exactly what the CC could do with now.

In reply to Al Evans:

That is why I said at one time. I joined in the late 70's and there was still an element of that in the huts and indeed a friend of mine who was a steel erector was refused entry despite meeting all the criteria. That would have been in the early 70's probably.

In reply to Choss:


In that case we disagree about what the words "good, competent and committed" mean. (Sorry for being elitist!, though to me an "elite" grade would be more like E5 or 6.)

In reply to Choss:

the grade has only ever been a guide, never a hard and fast rule. If you want a club full of climbers, how do you judge what a 'climber'actually is? By letting them tell you about their climbing history and experience? By getting them to climb with other members of the club? By suggesting the sort of level that might be around about what you might expect of them?

The climbers club does all of these, looking at the person as a whole person and trying to encompass the whole of the range of climbing into a couple of sides of A4.

"Membership is open to any enthusiastic and competent rock-climber or mountaineer who is experienced at leading adventurous climbs; we are not a club for novices or the inexperienced."

http://www.climbers-club.co.uk/about-apply.html

In reply to Coel Hellier:


Surely you mean E(n+2) where E(n) is one's own current onsight grade.

In reply to Double Knee Bar:


Goodness! When was this? What happened? *sits back and waits for a good story*

One of the things that attracted me to the CC rather than the FRCC was the air of anarchy and disobedience, people wanting to be individuals within a club. The people have been the best thing about the club - how else can you meet so many experienced climbers, with regular meets in both the uk and abroad? Many of my climbing mates have stopped climbing, or moved to other countries, or had families, and it gets harder to arrange group meets to the hills. I feel as though I have a ready made climbing family, with new blood joining every month, and an active membership where it really doesn't take long to get to know people. In fact, a group of people not dissimilar to me! What's not to like about it?

In reply to kingholmesy:

On the 'wanting to join but not necessarily knowing enough CC members' meet I went to the discussion was had about grade and the emphasis was on competence in a certain sort of situation. One example given was a severe or hard severe on Lliwedd.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Not really. Elite climbers are those who can do stuff weekend punters can't. That means at least E7, maybe more. E5 has been mid-grade since the 80s, as Dougie Hall famously pointed out.

One of the most important parts of the CC admission process is, or ought to be, that anyone found bleating witlessly about elitism in a climbing context is immediately rejected and any member doing so is thrown out. Climbing is inherently elitist or it is nothing.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


I agree (sort of genererally). I was just making the point that many people seem to equate "elite" to "better than me" just because they are rubbish,


Agree absolutely.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Presumably they check that you're having enough fun, though?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:



Ah, John, but what do you do about the old fogies who have loyally paid their subs, served on comittees, written guidebooks for the club and developed whole new areas for around 50+ years, just kick them out? Because if that's what you think I should be kicked out of the CC, and anyway would no longer wish to be a member.

In reply to kingholmesy:
A cynic might argue it should be called the 'Multi-pitch trad climbers who are at least better than average club' (given that VS is about the average grade climbed if I remember the UKC surveys rightly?) :P

In reply to andrewmcleod:


But Apparently the majority of people on here that Climb Below VS are rubbish and incompetent.

In reply to andrewmcleod:


What it really should be called is the "Competent and committed climbers who won't trash the huts club". The problem is how to assess people on those criteris. A pretty basic grade like (multi-pitch) VS might be a blunt but reasonably effective tool for "competent and committed" and finding a proposer and seconder might be a reasonable way of ensuring the huts don't get trashed.

In reply to Choss:

I don't think the attitude is that climbers who can't manage VS are incompetent. It's just that competency is a spectrum, and VS climbing isn't very far along it.
The solution is to join the CC*, get elected to the committee then change the rules.

*You might have to lie a little bit on your application if you don't climb VS.

Andy

(Also a CC member, but not very active with them)

In reply to Choss:


Rubbish, but not necessarily incompetent.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Well then I am rubbish (not that I would ever say otherwise, but you don't need to rub it in)...

In reply to 999thAndy:

To late, it's already been done (assuming their website is up to date):
http://www.climbers-club.co.uk/downloads/Joining-FAQ.pdf

"What climbing experience do I need?/What are the membership criteria?

We are always looking to recruit new members who are climbers and mountaineers who are experienced and competent leaders of adventurous climbs. There is no minimum grade of climb which you must achieve; we look at the overall experience of each applicant."

In reply to andrewmcleod:


But I'm sure you're highly competent though!

In reply to kingholmesy:

I been ibn the CC since the mid 70s on various committees and seen a lot of changes all for the best, but it is still the leading climbing club because you do need to be competant at around a VS muti pitch climber as many as said so you know if asked in the hut do you fancy doing a route they are ok.

As for youger members we are having more joining but as we all were young we just wanted to go out climbing with our mates etc, and join the CC later on so I can't see a problem there.
One good thing about most of the bus pass climbers in the CC like myself spend around 6 months a year abroad climbing at all grades and dissaplines as well as the UK

In reply to Al Evans:


No, of course not. Once you're in, you're in, absent misbehaviour. Unless you transgress the 'bleating about elitism' provision.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

It's too late, John. The CC hit squad's already been round to Al's. Keith's been told to pull his socks up - an E5 a week, if you please, until further notice. Progress to be monitored every two weeks.

Choss may - and I emphasise may - be allowed in, if he does 10 solos in Ladram Bay before the end of the month. And he has to swim back each time. (Could be tricky; the poor bugger can't swim!)

Standards - tightening!!! Watch this space.

Mick (Unashamed riff-raff non-member, wouldn't you just know it?)

In reply to Mick Ward:

Mick: congratulations. You have become the first non-member of the CC to be black-balled and thrown out of the club; you should be very proud.

Al: we crusties must stick together. You can join my club. Membership currently 1.

Keith: disagree with your post. Can we still be friends....please!

In reply to Choss:


Possibly it isn't, though, I'm thinking why would one join a cycling club (for instance)?

In reply to Choss:

I'm not a member, but they do appear to say they're not a club for novices or the inexperienced, so at least they're upfront about things. They are what it says on the tin, as it were.

In reply to Iain Peters:


Well you must take your compliments where you can (i.e. anywhere!) Sadly however, mediocrity is my middle name. I once profiled someone who fondly reminisced that he'd been thrown out of three clubs - which left me green with envy.

First exit was from the Creag Dhu for joining another club, the SMC. (Apparently, if you were in the Creag Dhu, back then, you couldn't be anywhere else.)

He was told to sling his hook by the SMC for not paying his hut fees. Well, they were all Scotsmen, weren't they? (Racist remark!)

He reckoned that (like moi?) he'd been blackballed in advance by the CC for thumping their President.

The odd thing is that, since then, he's risen to be a pillar of the establishment.

Personally I preferred him when he was a pillar of the disestablishment.

Awkward buggers of the world untie!

Mick

In reply to kingholmesy:

I hope all you CCers are coming to the annual dinner apparently it will be awesome this year Climbing Comps, Mountain Biking, Great Grub a Band for those with a pulse and quiet room to quaff Port if the noise is too much http://www.climbers-club.co.uk/meet-booking/event.php?ref=143

I would prefer our club to admit anyone who considers themselves to be an active adventurous climber - and to take their word for it when they apply.

At the same time I do agree that the CC should not be for non climbers or for anti social pillocks.

Why don't we just allow all who submit a proper application to join but on the basis that the first year of membership is probationary. Then if, in the course of that year, the odd person appears to be a bullshitter or a pain then members can alert the committee and we can decide not to confirm their membership.

In over 35 years of keen climbing I have hardly ever met a climber who was not a decent sort of person. Of the few people who were an exceptions to this rule a good proportion were already CC members (such as the apparently stupidly elitist John Cox.....or were you just joking?)

To me this rather suggests that existing membership criteria are a pretty worthless filter.

In reply to kingholmesy:
It's important that CC members are competent and experienced trad climbers, in fact this is one of the advantages of being in the CC: you can be reasonably sure that if you hook up with someone on a meet or at a hut, they know how to build a belay etc and won't get freaked out on multi pitch. They don't need to climb particularly hard though and the old VS requirement has been relaxed somewhat. So anyone with a love and reasonable experience of trad multipitch at even a modest level can get in. It isn't particularly elitist.

The entry requirements are focused on trad because that is what requires competence. You need more ropework and gear skills to climb a multi pitch V Diff than a single pitch sport route or a boulder problem of a much higher technical and physical level. Besides, Britain is thankfully still primarily a trad climbing area and so it's not unreasonable to require trad credentials for joining a national climbing club.

Most local clubs accept trad beginners and indeed people who haven't done any climbing at all, so if someone needs to get that experience they can join a local club and then join the CC later. That's what I did. Of course I didn't even know about the CC when I started out.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: 'Climbing is inherently elitist or it is nothing.'

Yes. Thank you.

In reply to kingholmesy:

Whenever the CC gets mentioned Elitism gets mentions yet the grade VS is no longer a part of the entry requirements so that is gone.

I fail to see what is wrong with a climbing club asking that people who wish to join it are committed to climbing and safe. I joined a different club recently and I am wary about climbing with some members indoors because the casual attitude to safety and belaying I have seen on some occasions genuinely scares me and has seriously injured one member.

I'm bloody chuffed that I won't face that issue in the CC.
It's easier to join than you think, even if you don't know anyone you basically only have to go on a couple of climbing trips and you're likely sorted.
If anyone near Essex joins we could share petrol costs to meets.

In reply to colin struthers:

What the Climbers Club and all Clubs actually need are Members who will be Members, people who attend and more importantly are prepared to organize meets which are the Raison de terre of any Club, facilitating the meeting of people so they can climb, people who are prepared from time to time to help maintain huts be that as custodians or attending working parties, people to attend AGM`s and Dinners , write newsletters, moderate facebook pages etc. People who just join and then never take an active part are not really part of the club.
Whilst I think the VS thing is a good idea (they made me climb HVS) I think the CC and other clubs would be wise to do something like I believe the FRCC do and that your a Graduate for a couple of years in which time your expected to take an active roll in the club, which IMO is fair enough.

In reply to colin struthers:


Anyone who can't see that elitism is absolutely central to climbing is, on the contrary, stupid. Elitism does not mean looking down on the less able(lets get that straight). It simply means accepting that some people are better at climbing than others and, yes, celebrating that fact; for individuals to accept that there are many climbs they will never be able to do and that there is no place for dragging these climbs down to their own level through dubious actions and ethics. Without elitism, aspiration, pushing of standards and in fact the whole development of climbing would be undermined.

Elitism is not a dirty word; it is the driving force behind much of what is great about climbing.

In reply to GLUF:

All this is certainly true of the CC and similar clubs, but by far the most important function of any club is to facilitate meeting other like-minded climbers to climb with. The CC does this very well for the majority of members simply by having some basic entry requirements and access to shared huts. Meets and dinners are great for those who want to organise them, but I suspect most CC members never attend and that should be absolutely fine.
The most effective club I have ever been a member of had no meets, no hut, apparently no structure, in fact pretty much no anything apart from an informal pub gathering on a Thursday, but within a couple of weeks of arriving in a strange city I had like minded climbing partners on tap for any weekend and virtually any evening.

In reply to Robert Durran:

So you did have an informal regular meet, in the Pub. I assume that is the foundation of most clubs, a few climbers meeting in the Pub on a Thursday to plan the weekend. Huts and Newsletters and Dinners are all just add ons.

In reply to GLUF:


Yes. That is how that club worked (very well). The CC works (for the majority) through its hut system (also very well).

In reply to GLUF:

We tend to meet in the Carlton Club, it's proved to be most convenient as the majority of CC people are members of both

In reply to Robert Durran:

I go on meets and meet people and that has been a great success, but are you suggesting I just turn up at a hut and expect to meet a partner? sounds dodgy to me. I would have thought that outside of meets people go teamed up, it`s what I do, and some random asking for partners might be a nuisance.

In reply to Mike Highbury:

Whats the Carlton Club.

In reply to Robert Durran:

The way that most people see the CC can put people off joining, mainly the entry requirements, and that the view that it's full of older people, but the CC need to make people aware of the benefits of joing it and/or other clubs.

I know that the entry requirement isn't what it used to be, but what are the benfits of joining it instead of/in addition to other local clubs?
Why should I join the CC?

In reply to dsgarner:




http://www.climbers-club.co.uk/about-intro.html

" Access to a network of potential climbing partners all over the country
• Regular meets throughout the year, in the UK and overseas (see Meets page)
• Use of the CC's huts in Wales, Cornwall, Peak District and Scotland (see Huts page)
• Reciprocal rights to other huts in the UK and overseas including USA, New Zealand, Kenya and S.Africa
• Two annual dinners and various other social events
• Discounted CC guidebooks from our on-line shop and Cordee"

In reply to dsgarner:


Primarily, access to the hut network, including huts in Snowdonia, the Peak, Lakes, Cornwall, Pembroke and Lochaber.

In reply to Robert Durran:

sounds like the Etchachan club which did (at least in the 1980s) have an annual dinner, although it was never quite clear who the members were & who just happened to be in the pub most thursdays
Happy days

In reply to Iain Peters:
How dare you disagree with me you know I know all being an Elitist and all that and don't hold grudges so yess we can be friends on my terms only.
LOL Keith s

In reply to GLUF:


No, that's not what I mean. But you will meet like minded, intertesting people that you might get to know and climb with in the future.

In reply to Mick Ward:

Mick yes the hit squad's been and rapped my knuckles so much I can't get them in the dam cracks, as some famous climber said dam benana fingers,
guess it didn't stop him eh.
keith s

In reply to dsgarner:


For me the main benefit of being in the CC is that I can drive eight hours to pembroke, say, and know that I will have a nice hut to stay in if it is pissing with rain.

In reply to Doug:


Got it in one!


Indeed.

In reply to keith sanders:

Didn't stop him and doubt it will stop you for very long.

Fight the good fight!

Mick