This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Good to see that Pettifer's Wall has seen at least four ascents already this year [http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=92224] (I suspect few E4's in Scotland have seen more) and it's quality praised and that those who claimed it would be forgotten under a layer of dirt after the removal of the bolts have been proved wrong. I hope that last tear's whole retro-bolting saga and cleaning up efforts have, in the longer term, helped ensure that Ratho has a bright future as a fine mixed trad and sport venue.
In reply to sheppy:
Only to satisfy hose who would actually like to see the route forgotten under a layer of dirt.
> That bolted lower still needs chopped though.
Only to satisfy hose who would actually like to see the route forgotten under a layer of dirt.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Almost a year since the bolts were chopped and it's had less ticks than it did during the 4 months it was bolted.
But hey, perhaps if you keep giving it this level of attention it'll get a few more!
mfw.
Almost a year since the bolts were chopped and it's had less ticks than it did during the 4 months it was bolted.
But hey, perhaps if you keep giving it this level of attention it'll get a few more!
mfw.
In reply to Removed User:
Kamikaze, the sport route to the right, has only 5 ticks in 2014 in the logbooks, to Pettifer's 4 (and I know at least 3 of those Kamikaze ticks are people who are interested in climbing Pettifer's as a trad route). So I would say it's more down to the initial surge of popularity dying down.
I was noncommital at the time of the bolting, but having been back and seen Pettifer's, it's blatantly better left as a trad route. It's a great line.
Kamikaze, the sport route to the right, has only 5 ticks in 2014 in the logbooks, to Pettifer's 4 (and I know at least 3 of those Kamikaze ticks are people who are interested in climbing Pettifer's as a trad route). So I would say it's more down to the initial surge of popularity dying down.
I was noncommital at the time of the bolting, but having been back and seen Pettifer's, it's blatantly better left as a trad route. It's a great line.
Post edited at 09:58
In reply to Removed User:
It's actually only 9 months since the bolts were chopped and most of that has been winter.
Anyway, nobody would ever expect an E4 to get anything like as much traffic as a 6c simply because there are far fewer people capable of climbing E4 than 6c. I'm pleasantly surprised it's had as many as 4 ascents.
> Almost a year since the bolts were chopped and it's had less ticks than it did during the 4 months it was bolted.
It's actually only 9 months since the bolts were chopped and most of that has been winter.
Anyway, nobody would ever expect an E4 to get anything like as much traffic as a 6c simply because there are far fewer people capable of climbing E4 than 6c. I'm pleasantly surprised it's had as many as 4 ascents.
In reply to Removed User:
A E4 will always get a lot less attention than a 6c, but that's hardly a reason to bolt it. I'd say that trad routes should only be retroed if they are being completely untouched, this one clearly has some life in it.
> Almost a year since the bolts were chopped and it's had less ticks than it did during the 4 months it was bolted.
A E4 will always get a lot less attention than a 6c, but that's hardly a reason to bolt it. I'd say that trad routes should only be retroed if they are being completely untouched, this one clearly has some life in it.
In reply to Jamie B:
Well yes, this one was being completely untouched due to the earth cornice which hadn't been there originally - hence the controversy.
It had new life breathed into it by the residual chain.
> I'd say that trad routes should only be retroed if they are being completely untouched.
Well yes, this one was being completely untouched due to the earth cornice which hadn't been there originally - hence the controversy.
> This one clearly has some life in it.
It had new life breathed into it by the residual chain.
In reply to Jamie B:
UKC has 23925 logged E4 climbs, and 36731 logged 6c climbs, although the distribution for sports climbs is a little odd as there is an extra peak at 7a and 6c+ is significantly less. I was actually expecting the sports numbers to be higher, although I can't get number of routes by year and grade at the same time so this will affect the result. It would probably also be fairer to add the numbers for 6c and 6c+ for a comparison with E4?
Seems to have all worked out nicely in the end, anyway
UKC has 23925 logged E4 climbs, and 36731 logged 6c climbs, although the distribution for sports climbs is a little odd as there is an extra peak at 7a and 6c+ is significantly less. I was actually expecting the sports numbers to be higher, although I can't get number of routes by year and grade at the same time so this will affect the result. It would probably also be fairer to add the numbers for 6c and 6c+ for a comparison with E4?
Seems to have all worked out nicely in the end, anyway
Post edited at 15:12
In reply to andrewmcleod:
This is probably a good example of how using UKC statistics can lead you to (at minimum) dubious conclusions.
I think if you surveyed people at a popular crag, a popular climbing wall and a popular bouldering spot and combined the results, you would find a LOT more people who could climb F6c/+ than could climb E4.
> UKC has 23925 logged E4 climbs, and 36731 logged 6c climbs, although the distribution for sports climbs is a little odd as there is an extra peak at 7a and 6c+ is significantly less. I was actually expecting the sports numbers to be higher, although I can't get number of routes by year and grade at the same time so this will affect the result. It would probably also be fairer to add the numbers for 6c and 6c+ for a comparison with E4?
This is probably a good example of how using UKC statistics can lead you to (at minimum) dubious conclusions.
I think if you surveyed people at a popular crag, a popular climbing wall and a popular bouldering spot and combined the results, you would find a LOT more people who could climb F6c/+ than could climb E4.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Yes, you are right...
Although gloating on an on-line forum is somewhat unbecoming. I think the accepted way to do these things is to make an anonymous account, post your gloat and then reply to it with rabid agreement using your main.
:P
Yes, you are right...
Although gloating on an on-line forum is somewhat unbecoming. I think the accepted way to do these things is to make an anonymous account, post your gloat and then reply to it with rabid agreement using your main.
:P
In reply to henwardian:
and
are the main problems with your argument. Ever heard of the 'scientific method'?
> This is probably ....
and
> I think if ....
are the main problems with your argument. Ever heard of the 'scientific method'?
In reply to Robert Durran:
>"Pettifer's Wall has seen at least four ascents"
I expect all that has happend is the next ten years worth of ascents have been condensed into as many months due to the route's profile being raised.
Now the the four guys most likely to have done it, there could be a bit of a lull for a decade or two.
>"Pettifer's Wall has seen at least four ascents"
I expect all that has happend is the next ten years worth of ascents have been condensed into as many months due to the route's profile being raised.
Now the the four guys most likely to have done it, there could be a bit of a lull for a decade or two.
Post edited at 15:40
In reply to andrewmcleod:
Maybe because E4 is so much harder than 6c, people are more likely to bother logging an E4. Or maybe it's just that sport climbs are so much more forgettable than trad climbs that people forget to log them
> It would probably also be fairer to add the numbers for 6c and 6c+ for a comparison with E4?
Maybe because E4 is so much harder than 6c, people are more likely to bother logging an E4. Or maybe it's just that sport climbs are so much more forgettable than trad climbs that people forget to log them
In reply to JLS:
The same phenomenon would probably have happened if it had been left as a sports climb.
There are loads more people capable of climbing it or who might realistically aspire to climbing it and with its deserving and growing reputation for quality, they may well do so.
> >"Pettifer's Wall has seen at least four ascents"
> I expect all that has happend is the next ten years worth of ascents have been condensed into as many months due to the route's profile being raised.
The same phenomenon would probably have happened if it had been left as a sports climb.
> Now the the four guys most likely to have done it, there could be a bit of a lull for a decade or two.
There are loads more people capable of climbing it or who might realistically aspire to climbing it and with its deserving and growing reputation for quality, they may well do so.
Post edited at 15:50
In reply to henwardian:
As usual.
But it's so nice to be proved so resoundingly right (as usual) that I simply couldn't resist it. Sorry.
> Yes, you are right...
As usual.
> Although gloating on an on-line forum is somewhat unbecoming.
But it's so nice to be proved so resoundingly right (as usual) that I simply couldn't resist it. Sorry.
In reply to Sally Bustyerface:
I am well versed in it. That is way I said "this is probably" and "I think if". Qualified language for a qualified statement. Not a statement presented as fact when it is not factual or evidenced. I hope my posting history bears out that I am precise in presenting information as either facts, opinions or something somewhere between the two.
I'm not about to go out and carry the survey out myself or spend ages with duckduckgo trying to find studies that support my opinion. I'm just going to give my opinion
> are the main problems with your argument. Ever heard of the 'scientific method'?
I am well versed in it. That is way I said "this is probably" and "I think if". Qualified language for a qualified statement. Not a statement presented as fact when it is not factual or evidenced. I hope my posting history bears out that I am precise in presenting information as either facts, opinions or something somewhere between the two.
I'm not about to go out and carry the survey out myself or spend ages with duckduckgo trying to find studies that support my opinion. I'm just going to give my opinion
In reply to Robert Durran:
Logging is a voluntary-response survey. Statistics extracted from logging might tell you something about the loggers but often not much about the activity itself.
Logging is a voluntary-response survey. Statistics extracted from logging might tell you something about the loggers but often not much about the activity itself.
In reply to andrewmcleod:
The number of logged 6c's against logged E4s in the UKC database is going to depend on the availability of 6c sport routes in the UK as well as the number of people who could climb them if they were available.
If all the indoor 6c's that get climbed were logged there would be a gazillion more 6c ticks than E4 ticks.
> It would probably also be fairer to add the numbers for 6c and 6c+ for a comparison with E4?
The number of logged 6c's against logged E4s in the UKC database is going to depend on the availability of 6c sport routes in the UK as well as the number of people who could climb them if they were available.
If all the indoor 6c's that get climbed were logged there would be a gazillion more 6c ticks than E4 ticks.
In reply to rgold:
What it tells you is the minimum number of ascents a route has had. Which might be useful.
> Logging is a voluntary-response survey. Statistics extracted from logging might tell you something about the loggers but often not much about the activity itself.
What it tells you is the minimum number of ascents a route has had. Which might be useful.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
Yes, and that is all I (usefully) took from it in my OP.
> What it tells you is the minimum number of ascents a route has had. Which might be useful.
Yes, and that is all I (usefully) took from it in my OP.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Yes, actually, I mistakenly made it a reply to you. The comment was aimed at some of the other comparative statistics being discussed.
Yes, actually, I mistakenly made it a reply to you. The comment was aimed at some of the other comparative statistics being discussed.
In reply to henwardian:
Actually, if you look at the stats, E4 routes constitute 1.4% while F6c is 5.4% (of total logged trad and sport climbs respectively, I would assume?).
I would think that's a fairly reasonable estimate of total percentages of climbers who do/can climb E4 and 6c in the UK?
> This is probably a good example of how using UKC statistics can lead you to (at minimum) dubious conclusions.
> I think if you surveyed people at a popular crag, a popular climbing wall and a popular bouldering spot and combined the results, you would find a LOT more people who could climb F6c/+ than could climb E4.
Actually, if you look at the stats, E4 routes constitute 1.4% while F6c is 5.4% (of total logged trad and sport climbs respectively, I would assume?).
I would think that's a fairly reasonable estimate of total percentages of climbers who do/can climb E4 and 6c in the UK?
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Unfortunately this information (number of routes by grade) does not appear to be available on the UKC? Although it would be extremely interesting, and due to UKC's near-complete coverage should be much more reliable than the logged climbs data which will have strong selection selection effects. For bonus points you would probably want number of climbs by grade with something like the following criteria: only 1 star, 2 star, 3 star routes, only routes with over 1/5/10/50 logged climbs.
PS you will note that while I posted some statistics, I both indicated some (not all) of their limitations and did not actually draw any conclusions...
> The number of logged 6c's against logged E4s in the UKC database is going to depend on the availability of 6c sport routes in the UK as well as the number of people who could climb them if they were available.
Unfortunately this information (number of routes by grade) does not appear to be available on the UKC? Although it would be extremely interesting, and due to UKC's near-complete coverage should be much more reliable than the logged climbs data which will have strong selection selection effects. For bonus points you would probably want number of climbs by grade with something like the following criteria: only 1 star, 2 star, 3 star routes, only routes with over 1/5/10/50 logged climbs.
PS you will note that while I posted some statistics, I both indicated some (not all) of their limitations and did not actually draw any conclusions...
In reply to andrewmcleod:
Number of routes logged at each grade is available here -
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/graphs.html
> Unfortunately this information (number of routes by grade) does not appear to be available on the UKC?
Number of routes logged at each grade is available here -
http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/graphs.html
In reply to Phil79:
Yes, I know, I posted some from there on this thread earlier, and that was what we were discussing... What is not available is the number of routes on UKC at each grade, which is quite different.
Yes, I know, I posted some from there on this thread earlier, and that was what we were discussing... What is not available is the number of routes on UKC at each grade, which is quite different.
In reply to andrewmcleod:
Yeah I see what you're getting at now. Not particularly sharp today as I have a stinking cold.
UKC admin bods must be able to extract that info fairly easily from the route database, why not email them and ask? They could add it to the 'graphs' page for future use.
As someone up thread pointed out, its basically impossible to be sure how reliable/representative any of this data is anyway. Although I guess it's better than none at all.
Yeah I see what you're getting at now. Not particularly sharp today as I have a stinking cold.
UKC admin bods must be able to extract that info fairly easily from the route database, why not email them and ask? They could add it to the 'graphs' page for future use.
As someone up thread pointed out, its basically impossible to be sure how reliable/representative any of this data is anyway. Although I guess it's better than none at all.
In reply to Phil79:
No, its of no use at all, unless you want stats of UKC members who
a) can be bothered to log their climbs.
b) are honest.
c) and logs the low grade climbs as well as the high grade climbs.
WRT the original post; a route that has only been climbed 4 times in 9 months [according to the UKC logs] is not popular. Bolting the route will not reduce the number of trad climbers who have a shot or make it less popular, but will open the route up to more climbers who dont have a rack of gear or who just want to get out there and give it a go.
Bolting then cutting is just a waste of effort for all involved.
[Trad v sport, just get on and climb]
> Although I guess it's better than none at all.
No, its of no use at all, unless you want stats of UKC members who
a) can be bothered to log their climbs.
b) are honest.
c) and logs the low grade climbs as well as the high grade climbs.
WRT the original post; a route that has only been climbed 4 times in 9 months [according to the UKC logs] is not popular. Bolting the route will not reduce the number of trad climbers who have a shot or make it less popular, but will open the route up to more climbers who dont have a rack of gear or who just want to get out there and give it a go.
Bolting then cutting is just a waste of effort for all involved.
[Trad v sport, just get on and climb]
In reply to MaranaF:
For a route that will be damp all winter, it is reasonably popular by the strandards of Scottish E4's.
You're Gurumed and I claim my £5.
> WRT the original post; a route that has only been climbed 4 times in 9 months [according to the UKC logs] is not popular.
For a route that will be damp all winter, it is reasonably popular by the strandards of Scottish E4's.
> Bolting the route will not reduce the number of trad climbers who have a shot or make it less popular, but will open the route up to more climbers who dont have a rack of gear or who just want to get out there and give it a go.
> Bolting then cutting is just a waste of effort for all involved.
You're Gurumed and I claim my £5.
Post edited at 19:40
In reply to MaranaF:
Whilst not wishing to further erode a well worn discursive path, bolting a route will certainly reduce the number of trad climbers wishing to 'have a shot' for the very simple fact that it will no longer be a trad route.
Bolting and cutting is a LOT of effort for all concerned, but not a WASTE of effort because it results in a mistake being rectified.
Ratho routes at E4 and up are not 'popular' routes in any event as they tend be both technical and bold, and dolerite is not to everyones taste. Pettifers has had more lead ascents in the last 9 months than Artho, This Septic Heil, Alopecia, Wally 2 or 3, and indeed all of the E3s, making it possibly the most popular hard trad route in the quarry!
Congrats and thanks to all who have been involved in the cleaning, gardening, debolting, bolting (of new lines) and general improvement of Ratho Quarry. Its now an even better place to climb, and I encourage more people to rediscover this spot!
Whilst not wishing to further erode a well worn discursive path, bolting a route will certainly reduce the number of trad climbers wishing to 'have a shot' for the very simple fact that it will no longer be a trad route.
Bolting and cutting is a LOT of effort for all concerned, but not a WASTE of effort because it results in a mistake being rectified.
Ratho routes at E4 and up are not 'popular' routes in any event as they tend be both technical and bold, and dolerite is not to everyones taste. Pettifers has had more lead ascents in the last 9 months than Artho, This Septic Heil, Alopecia, Wally 2 or 3, and indeed all of the E3s, making it possibly the most popular hard trad route in the quarry!
Congrats and thanks to all who have been involved in the cleaning, gardening, debolting, bolting (of new lines) and general improvement of Ratho Quarry. Its now an even better place to climb, and I encourage more people to rediscover this spot!
Post edited at 20:17
But in the end when all is said and done Trad routes don't have bolted lower offs.
This is just a convenience measure and has no place in Scottish climbing.
It looks like the "thin end of the wedge" to me
This is just a convenience measure and has no place in Scottish climbing.
It looks like the "thin end of the wedge" to me
In reply to sheppy:
In much the same way as any two points can make a line, any single event (or "point", if you will) can make a wedge.
Unlike two points and a line, however, it doesn't actually mean it will.
In much the same way as any two points can make a line, any single event (or "point", if you will) can make a wedge.
Unlike two points and a line, however, it doesn't actually mean it will.
Post edited at 18:13
In reply to sheppy:
It's a quarry route with an overhanging earth top out. Would you attempt the route without the lower off?
It's a quarry route with an overhanging earth top out. Would you attempt the route without the lower off?
In reply to sheppy:
So, in this particular case, would you prefer to see the chain removed and the route fall into filthy neglect as it was before.
Straight yes or no please.
Incidentally I am against lower off's on trad routes in general, but feel the particular circumstances here ("earth cornice", chains on neighbouring sport routes in mixed venue) justify it.
> But in the end when all is said and done Trad routes don't have bolted lower offs.
So, in this particular case, would you prefer to see the chain removed and the route fall into filthy neglect as it was before.
Straight yes or no please.
Incidentally I am against lower off's on trad routes in general, but feel the particular circumstances here ("earth cornice", chains on neighbouring sport routes in mixed venue) justify it.
In reply
I actually think bolted lower off's and belays could have a very well deserved place in scottish climbing, and their current absence is a poor reflection on uk trad climbing attitudes. "An overhanging earth topout? No problem just bang in a few pegs, in few years time they will be sufficiently rusted and dubious enough that you'll be able to pat yourself on the back for an ascent of a 10m chosspile with French 5 technical difficulties as it's worthy of so many E points on an outdated and esoteric grading system.
I actually think bolted lower off's and belays could have a very well deserved place in scottish climbing, and their current absence is a poor reflection on uk trad climbing attitudes. "An overhanging earth topout? No problem just bang in a few pegs, in few years time they will be sufficiently rusted and dubious enough that you'll be able to pat yourself on the back for an ascent of a 10m chosspile with French 5 technical difficulties as it's worthy of so many E points on an outdated and esoteric grading system.
In reply to alex_arthur:
I'm not sure a few pegs in overhanging earth would inspire enough confidence to make it worth the bother.
What existing system of which you have experience using would you suggest replacing it with?
> In reply
> "An overhanging earth topout? No problem just bang in a few pegs......
I'm not sure a few pegs in overhanging earth would inspire enough confidence to make it worth the bother.
> .....so many E points on an outdated and esoteric grading system.
What existing system of which you have experience using would you suggest replacing it with?
Post edited at 00:37
In reply to gurumed:
Been a month since you posted on this acc, just come on to tell Robert that you're not someone else?
Been a month since you posted on this acc, just come on to tell Robert that you're not someone else?
In reply to FreshSlate:
Pretty much. It was a friend that brought to my attention that Robert mentioned me.
I'm disappointed to find that Robert isn't satisfied with getting things in a way that specifically suits him (no bolts, but lower off) but that he now feels a need to gloat.
> Been a month since you posted on this acc, just come on to tell Robert that you're not someone else?
Pretty much. It was a friend that brought to my attention that Robert mentioned me.
I'm disappointed to find that Robert isn't satisfied with getting things in a way that specifically suits him (no bolts, but lower off) but that he now feels a need to gloat.
In reply to gurumed:
Yes, it must be tough for you being such a loser
Although I admit there is an element of gloating (it is very satisfying after all my efforts to have not only won the debate last autumn but to now find that I am completely vindicated by the popularity of Pettfer's), my motivation in my OP was also to draw to people's attention to the fact that this and other routes are sufficiently clean and getting traffic and that after everyone's efforts (Buzby for his newly bolted routes, the retro-bolt-choppers, those who contributed to the quarry clean up), Ratho is a rejuvenated and very worthwhile venue for everyone.
And if you feel strongly enough about the lower off then obviously you should stick to your principles and go and chop it. You would have a defensible case for doing so but I think you would need to be careful that it didn't come across as mere sour grapes. Yes, it would spoil some peoples' fun, but so did the bolt chopping; sometimes principles are more important than fun.
> I'm disappointed to find that Robert isn't satisfied with getting things in a way that specifically suits him (no bolts, but lower off) but that he now feels a need to gloat.
Yes, it must be tough for you being such a loser
Although I admit there is an element of gloating (it is very satisfying after all my efforts to have not only won the debate last autumn but to now find that I am completely vindicated by the popularity of Pettfer's), my motivation in my OP was also to draw to people's attention to the fact that this and other routes are sufficiently clean and getting traffic and that after everyone's efforts (Buzby for his newly bolted routes, the retro-bolt-choppers, those who contributed to the quarry clean up), Ratho is a rejuvenated and very worthwhile venue for everyone.
And if you feel strongly enough about the lower off then obviously you should stick to your principles and go and chop it. You would have a defensible case for doing so but I think you would need to be careful that it didn't come across as mere sour grapes. Yes, it would spoil some peoples' fun, but so did the bolt chopping; sometimes principles are more important than fun.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
Your not serious
on a diffrent note i did wally 1(worth4stars)hard techy safe e2 and gruel brittania the other day and thought they were really good routes now that the trees are down a bit more traffic and ratho could be a great mixed venue.
Your not serious
on a diffrent note i did wally 1(worth4stars)hard techy safe e2 and gruel brittania the other day and thought they were really good routes now that the trees are down a bit more traffic and ratho could be a great mixed venue.
In reply to d conacher:
I think it was sarcasm aimed at the apparent cluelessness of Marana.
Yes. Superb route even when it always looked dank behind the trees.
> Your not serious
I think it was sarcasm aimed at the apparent cluelessness of Marana.
> On a diffrent note I did Wally 1(worth4stars)hard techy safe E2.
Yes. Superb route even when it always looked dank behind the trees.
In reply to Robert Durran:
It is unbecoming to be so ridiculously conceited. You didn't win the debate; Buz merely pulled the bolts to spare us from your pathetically incessant mewling.
Destroying hard work that other people did in order to spoil peoples fun is your game; not mine.
> it is very satisfying after all my efforts to have not only won the debate last autumn
It is unbecoming to be so ridiculously conceited. You didn't win the debate; Buz merely pulled the bolts to spare us from your pathetically incessant mewling.
> And if you feel strongly enough about the lower off then obviously you should stick to your principles and go and chop it.
Destroying hard work that other people did in order to spoil peoples fun is your game; not mine.
In reply to gurumed:
Is that what he told you? No, you just made it up. F*ck off.
Do you think spoiling people's fun was my motive for wanting the retro-bolts removed? No, you just made it up. Again, f*ck off.
Once again you are merely demonstataing your complete lack of any sort of grasp of the issues and resorting to plain lies instead. Moron.
> Buz merely pulled the bolts to spare us from your pathetically incessant mewling.
Is that what he told you? No, you just made it up. F*ck off.
> Destroying hard work that other people did in order to spoil peoples fun is your game; not mine.
Do you think spoiling people's fun was my motive for wanting the retro-bolts removed? No, you just made it up. Again, f*ck off.
Once again you are merely demonstataing your complete lack of any sort of grasp of the issues and resorting to plain lies instead. Moron.
In reply to Robert Durran:
I agree with you. Well done on getting the bolts removed. Retroing is stupid.
I agree with you. Well done on getting the bolts removed. Retroing is stupid.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Were you not so desperate to ensure no sport climber got to enjoy Wally 2 for a single extra day that you tried to do it without the correct tools and left the bolts in a dangerous state?
Disagreeing with you is not misapprehending the issues. Your claim that anyone of a different opinion is stupid only betrays your infantile solipsism.
> Do you think spoiling people's fun was my motive for wanting the retro-bolts removed?
Were you not so desperate to ensure no sport climber got to enjoy Wally 2 for a single extra day that you tried to do it without the correct tools and left the bolts in a dangerous state?
> Once again you are merely demonstataing your complete lack of any sort of grasp of the issues
Disagreeing with you is not misapprehending the issues. Your claim that anyone of a different opinion is stupid only betrays your infantile solipsism.
In reply to Robert Durran:
As long as Robert get's to act all superior and have his ego stroked he's happy.
As long as Robert get's to act all superior and have his ego stroked he's happy.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Seriously?
4 routes logged for a route that was so militantly defended and got a lot of exposure.
give it 2-3 years it will be logging 0 again
This was a long drawn out debate on both sides (i watched not participated) this post is little more than an attempt to rub it in the face of the pro bolt group.
Pretty unpleasant
Seriously?
4 routes logged for a route that was so militantly defended and got a lot of exposure.
give it 2-3 years it will be logging 0 again
This was a long drawn out debate on both sides (i watched not participated) this post is little more than an attempt to rub it in the face of the pro bolt group.
Pretty unpleasant
Post edited at 20:46
There are E4s that are unrepeated. Four logged (so possibly more unlogged) is quite a bit for that grade in a couple of summer months.
In reply to James90:
I saw it as a bit more than that. Robert is trying to show that his previous stance was NOT just a vain gesture, that neglected trad routes CAN be re-invigorated and that retro-bolting does not have to be the default solution to an underused crag.
> this post is little more than an attempt to rub it in the face of the pro bolt group.
I saw it as a bit more than that. Robert is trying to show that his previous stance was NOT just a vain gesture, that neglected trad routes CAN be re-invigorated and that retro-bolting does not have to be the default solution to an underused crag.
In reply to Jamie B:
Indeed they can.
In Roberts methodology all you need to do is ignore them for decades, biding your time until a kind soul like Buz unearths and bolts it. Wait a couple of months for the sport traffic to clean it up, then wail piteously until the bolts are removed so that no one can question that E4 tick. Be sure to haughtily gloat in a deplorably smug self satisfying way.
Seriously though, I agree that a neglected trad route can be resurrected without retrobolting. It could be be achieved in a less wretched manner.
> neglected trad routes CAN be re-invigorated
Indeed they can.
In Roberts methodology all you need to do is ignore them for decades, biding your time until a kind soul like Buz unearths and bolts it. Wait a couple of months for the sport traffic to clean it up, then wail piteously until the bolts are removed so that no one can question that E4 tick. Be sure to haughtily gloat in a deplorably smug self satisfying way.
Seriously though, I agree that a neglected trad route can be resurrected without retrobolting. It could be be achieved in a less wretched manner.
In reply to gurumed:
Arguably all that should have happened is that someone should have put a bolted loweroff in sooner, rather than later.
Arguably all that should have happened is that someone should have put a bolted loweroff in sooner, rather than later.
In reply to andrewmcleod:
This. With a massive pile of Earth put there during construction who can blame this climb for getting a bit neglected? (someone had shunted it that year if I remember).
It did not need to be retrobolted without permission, had it been discussed I imagine a lower-off would have been deemed an acceptable solutio.
> Arguably all that should have happened is that someone should have put a bolted loweroff in sooner, rather than later.
This. With a massive pile of Earth put there during construction who can blame this climb for getting a bit neglected? (someone had shunted it that year if I remember).
It did not need to be retrobolted without permission, had it been discussed I imagine a lower-off would have been deemed an acceptable solutio.
In reply to FreshSlate:
If I recall correctly, Buz talked to the first ascensionist. My guess is if he had known the grief that was in store for him he would've left the route under the dirt. He tried to get the rock into a state that it could be enjoyed by hundreds of people, what would be the motivation to place a lower off for the benefit of a mere handful who spit your efforts back in your face?
> It did not need to be retrobolted without permission, had it been discussed I imagine a lower-off would have been deemed an acceptable solutio.
If I recall correctly, Buz talked to the first ascensionist. My guess is if he had known the grief that was in store for him he would've left the route under the dirt. He tried to get the rock into a state that it could be enjoyed by hundreds of people, what would be the motivation to place a lower off for the benefit of a mere handful who spit your efforts back in your face?
In reply to gurumed:
The 'mere handful' who've done it this year seem happy enough!
> what would be the motivation to place a lower off for the benefit of a mere handful who spit your efforts back in your face?
The 'mere handful' who've done it this year seem happy enough!
In reply to gurumed:
No you recall wrong. The person the did the FA of PW was not consulted first.
Looking forward to leading it in the near future! Its a great looking line!
I'm sure I've said on here before, but I'll reiterate... The new sport routes that I've done are great... but it would be nice to see slow strain chopped, I'm aware it had changed a little since the FA, but it still looks good to trad.
Thanks again for the cleaning. Great venue now for sure.
Trist
No you recall wrong. The person the did the FA of PW was not consulted first.
Looking forward to leading it in the near future! Its a great looking line!
I'm sure I've said on here before, but I'll reiterate... The new sport routes that I've done are great... but it would be nice to see slow strain chopped, I'm aware it had changed a little since the FA, but it still looks good to trad.
Thanks again for the cleaning. Great venue now for sure.
Trist
The problem I see is that the traditionalists who cried foul (and always cry foul on here) are in this case guilty of rank hypocrisy.
Sport climbers arguments are usually derided as meaningless. "Making it safer", "making it more popular" and "more convenient to climb" are all shot down.
However when traddies want to make it safer, more convenient and more popular (as boasted by the start of this thread) it's ok to use bolts.
You just can't have it both ways.
You certainly are entitled to argue for bolt free but not for bolts where you want them for all the reasons you claim are invalid when others put them forward.
An earth bank? So what? Go get your bloody spades out like we had to do at Legaston Quarry 34 years ago.
Otherwise best get your trad ascent in quickly before the lower off goes.
Sport climbers arguments are usually derided as meaningless. "Making it safer", "making it more popular" and "more convenient to climb" are all shot down.
However when traddies want to make it safer, more convenient and more popular (as boasted by the start of this thread) it's ok to use bolts.
You just can't have it both ways.
You certainly are entitled to argue for bolt free but not for bolts where you want them for all the reasons you claim are invalid when others put them forward.
An earth bank? So what? Go get your bloody spades out like we had to do at Legaston Quarry 34 years ago.
Otherwise best get your trad ascent in quickly before the lower off goes.
In reply to sheppy:
Have to admit that in cold logic, you are quite right Sheppy, and a strong trad ethic should not be bent for convenience. I think there is a conversation to be had over bolted anchors vs piles of rotting tat, but thats a slightly different issue.
I thorougly enjoyed PW and if the loweroff gets chopped I will probably have to go back and do it again. Reckon I can get through that cornice with a bit of good old fashioned gorse-pulling....
Or lets just let this one be what it is (flawed but cool), agree to talk to each other before doing something similar elsewhere, and support Rob's sentiment of Ratho's "bright future as a fine mixed trad and sport venue" in the opening post.
Have to admit that in cold logic, you are quite right Sheppy, and a strong trad ethic should not be bent for convenience. I think there is a conversation to be had over bolted anchors vs piles of rotting tat, but thats a slightly different issue.
I thorougly enjoyed PW and if the loweroff gets chopped I will probably have to go back and do it again. Reckon I can get through that cornice with a bit of good old fashioned gorse-pulling....
Or lets just let this one be what it is (flawed but cool), agree to talk to each other before doing something similar elsewhere, and support Rob's sentiment of Ratho's "bright future as a fine mixed trad and sport venue" in the opening post.
Post edited at 22:10
A sensible response Dr T and all that's required to satisfy my concerns.
I suspect if we ever have the discussion of bolted lower offs versus rotting tat we will be of the same opinion.
As for PW... Who knows I might want to get the nuts n cams out and do it on gear but stuff digging out earth cornices.... 😃
I suspect if we ever have the discussion of bolted lower offs versus rotting tat we will be of the same opinion.
As for PW... Who knows I might want to get the nuts n cams out and do it on gear but stuff digging out earth cornices.... 😃
Without wanting to open another can of worms I hear another route has been bolted in the quarry that follows are similar line to Shear Fear. I'm away from Edinburgh for the next few weeks so can't go and check it out but can anyone confirm if it affects the line of Shear Fear at all? From the looks of it it'd be easy enough to reach over and clip the bolts whilst on Shear Fear, which would be a real shame as it's probably one of the best routes in the quarry!
In reply to chrisprescott:
I can confirm that I bolted a route left of Shear Fear 2 days ago. You can not reach any of the bolts from Shear Fear, if anyone can traverse off Shear Fear and clip them then I will personally take the bolts out myself. Its a good addition to the quarry and compliments routes on this wall nicely, hopefully people will enjoy it!
I can confirm that I bolted a route left of Shear Fear 2 days ago. You can not reach any of the bolts from Shear Fear, if anyone can traverse off Shear Fear and clip them then I will personally take the bolts out myself. Its a good addition to the quarry and compliments routes on this wall nicely, hopefully people will enjoy it!
In reply to gurumed:
People were upset about the retrobolting of a route, that will always cause some controversy if not agreed upon. It's not spitting in someone's face to point that out. Had the loweroff been agreed beforehand he would have simply been thanked for his efforts, no drama. Perhaps he wouldn't have cleaned the route, but that's totally his decision. Route cleaning does not entitle someone to bolt over existing trad lines.
> If I recall correctly, Buz talked to the first ascensionist. My guess is if he had known the grief that was in store for him he would've left the route under the dirt. He tried to get the rock into a state that it could be enjoyed by hundreds of people, what would be the motivation to place a lower off for the benefit of a mere handful who spit your efforts back in your face?
People were upset about the retrobolting of a route, that will always cause some controversy if not agreed upon. It's not spitting in someone's face to point that out. Had the loweroff been agreed beforehand he would have simply been thanked for his efforts, no drama. Perhaps he wouldn't have cleaned the route, but that's totally his decision. Route cleaning does not entitle someone to bolt over existing trad lines.
Post edited at 00:53
In reply to buzby78:
Sounds like you've given it some thought. Should be fine I hope!
> I can confirm that I bolted a route left of Shear Fear 2 days ago. You can not reach any of the bolts from Shear Fear, if anyone can traverse off Shear Fear and clip them then I will personally take the bolts out myself. Its a good addition to the quarry and compliments routes on this wall nicely, hopefully people will enjoy it!
Sounds like you've given it some thought. Should be fine I hope!
In reply to FreshSlate:
While you're there, why not go and do the Grapes and plums of ratho and Diverticulitis since there is a nicely cleaned access route up to the base of them now
While you're there, why not go and do the Grapes and plums of ratho and Diverticulitis since there is a nicely cleaned access route up to the base of them now
Haven't seen the new F6b+ in the flesh but I know the line having chatted to Buz about it, it's a really obvious line and addition well away from the trad stuff. Should become the default warm-up for Shear Fear and Strongarm .
In reply to buzby78:
OK great, thanks for confirming. Good to hear of a new independent line being established in the quarry, i'll have to go check it out once i'm back.
OK great, thanks for confirming. Good to hear of a new independent line being established in the quarry, i'll have to go check it out once i'm back.
In reply to Robert Durran:
To further Robert's positive and celebratory thread, I had yet another good afternoon out climbing both trad and sport in Ratho recently.
The new Impure Allure - good line, climbs nicely, really surprised it was never done on trad as it would have only been E4 6a-ish, but it wasn't so it makes a fine sport addition.
My mate did Shear Fear and really liked it of course.
I did Slow Strain on trad gear just for fun, partly inspired by a comment in the old Ratho bolts thread:
cat22: "I've climbed Slow Strain a couple of times this summer since the bolts went in, <snip> - didn't spot many obvious places for gear."
Complete nonsense of course, I got 10 bits of really obvious gear in and could have got more in, in fact I wish I had before the finish as it's quite bold and sketchy to clip the chain, the edges on the left are a bit fragile and if anyone is in the area with some Sika...
Strongarm - thanks a lot for levering the death flake off Robert, the remaining corner seems pretty solid and it's right back to being safe and climbable as it used to be.
Kamikaze - finished with this, really nice crimpy slab climbing, a fine addition and pretty fair at the grade really. The mantle move higher up is sweet!
When we left a team was enjoying Ouroborus, Shear Fear and starting up Impure Allure. We checked out the access to Grapes Of Ratho up the fixed rope, very easy, thanks for that Jamie Sparkes.
To further Robert's positive and celebratory thread, I had yet another good afternoon out climbing both trad and sport in Ratho recently.
The new Impure Allure - good line, climbs nicely, really surprised it was never done on trad as it would have only been E4 6a-ish, but it wasn't so it makes a fine sport addition.
My mate did Shear Fear and really liked it of course.
I did Slow Strain on trad gear just for fun, partly inspired by a comment in the old Ratho bolts thread:
cat22: "I've climbed Slow Strain a couple of times this summer since the bolts went in, <snip> - didn't spot many obvious places for gear."
Complete nonsense of course, I got 10 bits of really obvious gear in and could have got more in, in fact I wish I had before the finish as it's quite bold and sketchy to clip the chain, the edges on the left are a bit fragile and if anyone is in the area with some Sika...
Strongarm - thanks a lot for levering the death flake off Robert, the remaining corner seems pretty solid and it's right back to being safe and climbable as it used to be.
Kamikaze - finished with this, really nice crimpy slab climbing, a fine addition and pretty fair at the grade really. The mantle move higher up is sweet!
When we left a team was enjoying Ouroborus, Shear Fear and starting up Impure Allure. We checked out the access to Grapes Of Ratho up the fixed rope, very easy, thanks for that Jamie Sparkes.
In reply to Fiend:
Nice post Matt! I've been noticing more and more people climbing trad and sport out in the quarry this summer which is great (and really the original intention of new routes and clean ups)
Access to the bottom of routes is much easier, routes are clean and top outs are no longer jungle bush wacks. Long may this continue...
Nice post Matt! I've been noticing more and more people climbing trad and sport out in the quarry this summer which is great (and really the original intention of new routes and clean ups)
Access to the bottom of routes is much easier, routes are clean and top outs are no longer jungle bush wacks. Long may this continue...
In reply to Fiend:
>"it's quite bold and sketchy to clip the chain, the edges on the left are a bit fragile and if anyone is in the area with some Sika"
Chains and Sika. Trad climbing has changed.
>"it's quite bold and sketchy to clip the chain, the edges on the left are a bit fragile and if anyone is in the area with some Sika"
Chains and Sika. Trad climbing has changed.
In reply to Fiend:
Yeah, a fine evening. Oddly it's the first time I've climbed any trad routes at Ratho, having been a bit cursed with rain there before.
I'm amazed that Impure Allure wasn't done earlier as it's such an obvious independent line. Climbs well.
I also tried Strongarm, with visions of dancing up your chalk marks as the sun went down. But... it's pretty bloody hard! Pumped and came off half way up the left crack. I'll be back after a decent night's sleep (been up at 5 for work for the last week) as the gear's good and it's got some cool moves.
Then did Sedge Warbler in the dark. A nice route, and like Shear Fear, pretty soft for E2.
Yeah, a fine evening. Oddly it's the first time I've climbed any trad routes at Ratho, having been a bit cursed with rain there before.
I'm amazed that Impure Allure wasn't done earlier as it's such an obvious independent line. Climbs well.
I also tried Strongarm, with visions of dancing up your chalk marks as the sun went down. But... it's pretty bloody hard! Pumped and came off half way up the left crack. I'll be back after a decent night's sleep (been up at 5 for work for the last week) as the gear's good and it's got some cool moves.
Then did Sedge Warbler in the dark. A nice route, and like Shear Fear, pretty soft for E2.
In reply to Fiend:
Just for fun, what did you think the trad grad would be?
> I did Slow Strain on trad gear just for fun
Just for fun, what did you think the trad grad would be?
In reply to Mark Bull:
E3 now I reckon. The hard bits lower down are pretty well protected but a combination of a tricky-ish crux and the potential for a very long fall if you muffed the (steady) moves to / clipping the chain makes it a bit goey.
JLS:
The sika comment applied to it's functionality as a sport route too of course - the holds could deteriorate further with more use.
Danny C:
Nice one, yeah Strongarm is pretty powerful up the crack, I wasn't expecting that as I thought getting to the crack was going to be the crux.
Buz:
Cheers, was going to pop in and say hi but settled for perving on Adam Lincoln's tan instead.
E3 now I reckon. The hard bits lower down are pretty well protected but a combination of a tricky-ish crux and the potential for a very long fall if you muffed the (steady) moves to / clipping the chain makes it a bit goey.
JLS:
The sika comment applied to it's functionality as a sport route too of course - the holds could deteriorate further with more use.
Danny C:
Nice one, yeah Strongarm is pretty powerful up the crack, I wasn't expecting that as I thought getting to the crack was going to be the crux.
Buz:
Cheers, was going to pop in and say hi but settled for perving on Adam Lincoln's tan instead.
In reply to Fiend:
If I remember rightly, slow straing didn't originally take the arete all the way, which may account for the still crumbly top section on a once popular route. I think 1994 guide has it traversing out onto the left wall and finishing up the middle of this (halfway to quick pull)
Also, what the hell actually is Sika?
If I remember rightly, slow straing didn't originally take the arete all the way, which may account for the still crumbly top section on a once popular route. I think 1994 guide has it traversing out onto the left wall and finishing up the middle of this (halfway to quick pull)
Also, what the hell actually is Sika?
In reply to JamieSparkes:
Oh right. I've got rid of my old guide (shameful!), it did look like topping out on the arete would be a bit terminal.
Sika is a cement/glue that is often used in solidifying climbing holds (i.e. 90% of Peaks limestone is held together by the stuff...).
Oh right. I've got rid of my old guide (shameful!), it did look like topping out on the arete would be a bit terminal.
Sika is a cement/glue that is often used in solidifying climbing holds (i.e. 90% of Peaks limestone is held together by the stuff...).
In reply to JamieSparkes:
Fine Jamie, just move diagonally up and right a few metres and take a belay just below the top on a reasonable ledge. There was a wee path (now less wee) cleared through the jaggies above. Old straight up finish looks grim!
D.
Fine Jamie, just move diagonally up and right a few metres and take a belay just below the top on a reasonable ledge. There was a wee path (now less wee) cleared through the jaggies above. Old straight up finish looks grim!
D.
In reply to Fiend:
How does that fit in this thread? Sounds like retro bolted routes can still be climbed trad style and still be "fun".
> I did Slow Strain on trad gear just for fun, partly inspired by a comment in the old Ratho bolts thread:
How does that fit in this thread? Sounds like retro bolted routes can still be climbed trad style and still be "fun".
In reply to henwardian:
Doesn't everyone do that?
> ... I think the accepted way to do these things is to make an anonymous account, post your gloat and then reply to it with rabid agreement using your main.
Doesn't everyone do that?
In reply to gurumed:
F*ck off. You really are utterly pathetic.
F*ck off. You are stupid. Plenty of others who disagree with me are not and nor do they misapprehend (or lie) about the issues.
> Were you not so desperate to ensure no sport climber got to enjoy Wally 2 for a single extra day that you tried to do it without the correct tools and left the bolts in a dangerous state?
F*ck off. You really are utterly pathetic.
> Disagreeing with you is not misapprehending the issues. Your claim that anyone of a different opinion is stupid only betrays your infantile solipsism.
F*ck off. You are stupid. Plenty of others who disagree with me are not and nor do they misapprehend (or lie) about the issues.
In reply to sheppy:
can
Although I feel the chain is, on balance, justified in this case, I certainly have reservations about it and can respect anyone arguing sensibly (as you seem to be) for it's removal. If you feel strongly enough about it I think you probably ought to chop it.
can
> The problem I see is that the traditionalists who cried foul (and always cry foul on here) are in this case guilty of rank hypocrisy.
Although I feel the chain is, on balance, justified in this case, I certainly have reservations about it and can respect anyone arguing sensibly (as you seem to be) for it's removal. If you feel strongly enough about it I think you probably ought to chop it.
In reply to buzby78:
Keep up the good work!
Are you going to(or indeed have you) moved the bolts clippable on the right from Pettifer's?
> I can confirm that I bolted a route left of Shear Fear 2 days ago. You can not reach any of the bolts from Shear Fear, if anyone can traverse off Shear Fear and clip them then I will personally take the bolts out myself. Its a good addition to the quarry and compliments routes on this wall nicely, hopefully people will enjoy it!
Keep up the good work!
Are you going to(or indeed have you) moved the bolts clippable on the right from Pettifer's?
Post edited at 18:45
In reply to Robert Durran:
All irrelevant now as it fell down last night. With a little help.
> F*ck off. You really are utterly pathetic.
> F*ck off. You are stupid. Plenty of others who disagree with me are not and nor do they misapprehend (or lie) about the issues.
All irrelevant now as it fell down last night. With a little help.
In reply to Adam Lincoln:
What fell down? Pettifer's? The chain? The whole quarry? The EICA? Gurumed?
> All irrelevant now as it fell down last night. With a little help.
What fell down? Pettifer's? The chain? The whole quarry? The EICA? Gurumed?
In reply to Robert Durran:
Wally 2. If thats the one with the flakes.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=680689458686360&set=vb.34496191559...
> What fell down? Pettifer's? The chain? The whole quarry? The EICA? Gurumed?
Wally 2. If thats the one with the flakes.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=680689458686360&set=vb.34496191559...
In reply to Adam Lincoln:
I can never remember which Wally is which, but that is not the retrobolted one I chopped last year which is further right.
> Wally 2. If thats the one with the flakes.
I can never remember which Wally is which, but that is not the retrobolted one I chopped last year which is further right.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Fri Night Vid Finding Focus - Life Behind The Lens of a Climbing Photographer
This week's Friday Night Video is a portrait of a prolific climbing photographer from Wedge Climbing. Sam Pratt is well known in both the outdoor and competition scene but if you haven't heard of him, you've likely seen...
26 Apr
Loading Notifications...