This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Tommy Caldwell and Kevin Jorgeson have now begun their first serious push to free their Dawn wall project on El Capitan, Yosemite.After having worked the route for six years, all the difficult pitches had finally been climbed free in mid November. Tommy and Kevin then worked some of the pitches a...
Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=69401
In reply to UKC News:
This will surely be one of the most impressive feats in climbing history. For me its by far the most inspiring! Go on boys!
This will surely be one of the most impressive feats in climbing history. For me its by far the most inspiring! Go on boys!
In reply to UKC News:
If Tommy can pull it off then it will be a fantastic achievement for him. He's put so much into this route, year after year, he deserves all the success.
If Tommy can pull it off then it will be a fantastic achievement for him. He's put so much into this route, year after year, he deserves all the success.
In reply to UKC News:
It's been great to watch the guys progress on the route recently - really inspiring.
How much of the route is bolted and to what extent are they placing gear?
I also got the impression from on of Jorgeson's posts that they are each trying to lead all the pitches?
It's been great to watch the guys progress on the route recently - really inspiring.
How much of the route is bolted and to what extent are they placing gear?
I also got the impression from on of Jorgeson's posts that they are each trying to lead all the pitches?
In reply to Stevie989:
Just an educated guess, but I suspect it's a mix of bolts, fixed gear and normal trad gear. Bolts are only usually where they're really needed as you can only use a hand drill in yosemite.
On the easier pitches they're probably placing most of the gear on lead, no point leaving it in when they're most likely to do the pitch first or second go. On the harder pitches I suspect they're leaving a lot of it in. The hard pitches will probably need 10s of attempts and to strip the gear every time would add up to a lot of effort over the course of the route.
> How much of the route is bolted and to what extent are they placing gear?
Just an educated guess, but I suspect it's a mix of bolts, fixed gear and normal trad gear. Bolts are only usually where they're really needed as you can only use a hand drill in yosemite.
On the easier pitches they're probably placing most of the gear on lead, no point leaving it in when they're most likely to do the pitch first or second go. On the harder pitches I suspect they're leaving a lot of it in. The hard pitches will probably need 10s of attempts and to strip the gear every time would add up to a lot of effort over the course of the route.
In reply to Stevie989:
A prevailing ethic in Yosemite - an arena in which bolts have played a substantial part for decades - is that subsequent ascents, in whatever style, should not increase the bolt count. This has, of course, been modified over the years; time was when bolts were only placed at belays if natural anchors were inadequate or absent, whereas nowadays multiple and very sturdy bolts are more-or-less the default scenario at the majority of belays on most remotely popular routes. This is in opposition to those who believe that on a wall the belays, too, should be "adventurous" - but theirs tends to be a minority view. But leaving aside the belays, it's still considered very much bad form - or whatever that is in American - to get the drill out in the course of a pitch if you're not doing the FA or the rock hasn't in some way altered since somebody else did. But people are sometimes weak, and climbers are people, so there are are many instances - often very specific and subject to ridicule - in which the "rules" have been bent; the results are generally known, for obvious reasons, as "chicken bolts". Of course, all this tended to apply mostly to aid climbing; such extra bolts would appear where somebody's aid skills were insufficient to make a particularly tricky placement stick, or where their nerve cracked during the course of a section of hooks or expanding nailing. The point to remember, though, is that the ethic also still applies when free-climbing an aid route; unlike in some parts of the UK, where bolted free routes have replaced largely or completely boltless old aid routes, in Yosemite such an outcome wouldn't generally be regarded as an improvement in style. It's likely, therefore, that people attempting free ascents on El Cap and similar will go to considerable lengths to avoid adding bolts to the pitches that they are working on, and I'm unaware of any reason to think that Caldwell might be any different in this respect.
On something as big as a wall, of course, it would be unusual to find a viable free route that exactly followed an existing aid route throughout its whole length; free versions of walls tend to involve substantial variations onto more practicable free-climbing terrain, including, as in this case, onto quite separate routes. Such departures from the original line often involve completely new sections of climbing on which it is up to the climber involved, as with any first ascentionist, whether and how to equip the new climbing with fixed/drilled gear. As these new links often follow discreet lines of usable holds, rather than the more obvious features of interest to the original aid-climbers, they tend to be on blankish rock and can hence require bolts for protection, or nothing. At least three such link pitches are to found on the "Free Dawn Wall", two of which appear to constitute most of the crux.
These two topos should give an idea of the number of bolts on the existing pitches that the free route uses; x = bolt/"drilled placement".
http://yosemitebigwall.com/mescalito
http://yosemitebigwall.com/wall-early-morning-light
It follows the first five pitches of Mescalito; three on Adrift; link traverse (new) back into Mescalito pitch 9; pitches 10, 11, 12 of Mescalito; two link traverse pitches (new) leftwards into Wall of Early Morning Light - arriving (I think) somewhere near or just below the point at which New Dawn arrives from the other direction; five pitches (the first being the "dyno-pitch") following WoEML to a pitch above Wino Tower (with the possible exception of one which might be on Reticent); a short link up and round onto the ledge atop Mescalito's Bismark (the two routes are very close at this point); whereafter it follows the next four and-a-half pitches of Mescalito before traversing right and climbing up to finish either on or just right of Mescalito's final pitch (probably the latter). It should be remembered that some or many of the "bolts", particularly those on the ladders on the WoEML pitches, are likely to be of an ancient and spindly variety such as an aid-climber might gently ease his weight onto, rather than the sort of Petzl-branded product onto which one might cheerfully take successive and increasing lobs during the course of a redpoint project!
Hope this is of some vague help and interest.
> How much of the route is bolted?>
A prevailing ethic in Yosemite - an arena in which bolts have played a substantial part for decades - is that subsequent ascents, in whatever style, should not increase the bolt count. This has, of course, been modified over the years; time was when bolts were only placed at belays if natural anchors were inadequate or absent, whereas nowadays multiple and very sturdy bolts are more-or-less the default scenario at the majority of belays on most remotely popular routes. This is in opposition to those who believe that on a wall the belays, too, should be "adventurous" - but theirs tends to be a minority view. But leaving aside the belays, it's still considered very much bad form - or whatever that is in American - to get the drill out in the course of a pitch if you're not doing the FA or the rock hasn't in some way altered since somebody else did. But people are sometimes weak, and climbers are people, so there are are many instances - often very specific and subject to ridicule - in which the "rules" have been bent; the results are generally known, for obvious reasons, as "chicken bolts". Of course, all this tended to apply mostly to aid climbing; such extra bolts would appear where somebody's aid skills were insufficient to make a particularly tricky placement stick, or where their nerve cracked during the course of a section of hooks or expanding nailing. The point to remember, though, is that the ethic also still applies when free-climbing an aid route; unlike in some parts of the UK, where bolted free routes have replaced largely or completely boltless old aid routes, in Yosemite such an outcome wouldn't generally be regarded as an improvement in style. It's likely, therefore, that people attempting free ascents on El Cap and similar will go to considerable lengths to avoid adding bolts to the pitches that they are working on, and I'm unaware of any reason to think that Caldwell might be any different in this respect.
On something as big as a wall, of course, it would be unusual to find a viable free route that exactly followed an existing aid route throughout its whole length; free versions of walls tend to involve substantial variations onto more practicable free-climbing terrain, including, as in this case, onto quite separate routes. Such departures from the original line often involve completely new sections of climbing on which it is up to the climber involved, as with any first ascentionist, whether and how to equip the new climbing with fixed/drilled gear. As these new links often follow discreet lines of usable holds, rather than the more obvious features of interest to the original aid-climbers, they tend to be on blankish rock and can hence require bolts for protection, or nothing. At least three such link pitches are to found on the "Free Dawn Wall", two of which appear to constitute most of the crux.
These two topos should give an idea of the number of bolts on the existing pitches that the free route uses; x = bolt/"drilled placement".
http://yosemitebigwall.com/mescalito
http://yosemitebigwall.com/wall-early-morning-light
It follows the first five pitches of Mescalito; three on Adrift; link traverse (new) back into Mescalito pitch 9; pitches 10, 11, 12 of Mescalito; two link traverse pitches (new) leftwards into Wall of Early Morning Light - arriving (I think) somewhere near or just below the point at which New Dawn arrives from the other direction; five pitches (the first being the "dyno-pitch") following WoEML to a pitch above Wino Tower (with the possible exception of one which might be on Reticent); a short link up and round onto the ledge atop Mescalito's Bismark (the two routes are very close at this point); whereafter it follows the next four and-a-half pitches of Mescalito before traversing right and climbing up to finish either on or just right of Mescalito's final pitch (probably the latter). It should be remembered that some or many of the "bolts", particularly those on the ladders on the WoEML pitches, are likely to be of an ancient and spindly variety such as an aid-climber might gently ease his weight onto, rather than the sort of Petzl-branded product onto which one might cheerfully take successive and increasing lobs during the course of a redpoint project!
Hope this is of some vague help and interest.
4
In reply to Ian Parsons:
Could you be a bit more precise, Ian...?!
I see Tom Evan's ElCap Report is up and running for the ascent. Some great pics - although when I looked a minute ago something didn't seem to be working properly. Hope he gets it fixed.
Could you be a bit more precise, Ian...?!
I see Tom Evan's ElCap Report is up and running for the ascent. Some great pics - although when I looked a minute ago something didn't seem to be working properly. Hope he gets it fixed.
In reply to UKC News:
Wow! Loads of info.
Just watched a day two video and the 1st 5.14 pitch is protected by beaks! Mental!
Wow! Loads of info.
Just watched a day two video and the 1st 5.14 pitch is protected by beaks! Mental!
In reply to jon:
Hi Jon
Sorry - yet again brevity got the better of me.
This 2012 Mescalito trip report might be interesting:
http://www.supertopo.com/tr/Mescalito-June-2012/t11604n.html
It has shots of pitches 2,3,4,10,11(pre-Molar),and 12(Molar Traverse); the ground beyond the leader on 12 is crossed by the two crux traverse pitches (the Molar itself is ONLY 5.14a!), and is a bit more vertical than it looks in the pictures. Further on are some of the pitches after it rejoins Mescalito atop Bismark - nos 20,21,23. There is also mention of the Beaks on pitch 10.
Hi Jon
Sorry - yet again brevity got the better of me.
This 2012 Mescalito trip report might be interesting:
http://www.supertopo.com/tr/Mescalito-June-2012/t11604n.html
It has shots of pitches 2,3,4,10,11(pre-Molar),and 12(Molar Traverse); the ground beyond the leader on 12 is crossed by the two crux traverse pitches (the Molar itself is ONLY 5.14a!), and is a bit more vertical than it looks in the pictures. Further on are some of the pitches after it rejoins Mescalito atop Bismark - nos 20,21,23. There is also mention of the Beaks on pitch 10.
In reply to Ian Parsons:
Ah, it's working again now:
http://www.elcapreport.com/content/elcap-report-12272014-special-dawn-wall-...
http://www.elcapreport.com/content/elcap-report-12282014-special-dawn-wall-...
http://www.elcapreport.com/content/elcap-report-12292014-special-dawn-wall-...
I think Day 4 is a rest day.
Ah, it's working again now:
http://www.elcapreport.com/content/elcap-report-12272014-special-dawn-wall-...
http://www.elcapreport.com/content/elcap-report-12282014-special-dawn-wall-...
http://www.elcapreport.com/content/elcap-report-12292014-special-dawn-wall-...
I think Day 4 is a rest day.
In reply to Ian Parsons:
I like he way they've only given letter grades to pitches of 5.13a and above, clearly unable to distinguish between 5.12a and 5.12d as it's all just scrambling
I like he way they've only given letter grades to pitches of 5.13a and above, clearly unable to distinguish between 5.12a and 5.12d as it's all just scrambling
In reply to john arran:
Indeed, John - much, for instance, as I often find myself agonising over whether my latest redpoint project is 3c, 3c+, or even (gasp!) 4a. But I think we must be looking at different topos; apart from the last bit of pitch 9, pitches 23 and 24, and odd sections of 5.8/5.9, everything else seems to have a qualifying letter. Perhaps it's being updated as we type, and I didn't peer closely enough on first inspection.
Ah - my mistake; just realised you were referring to the summary pitch rating list, rather than individual pitch ratings on the actual topo.
> I like he way they've only given letter grades to pitches of 5.13a and above, clearly unable to distinguish between 5.12a and 5.12d as it's all just scrambling
Indeed, John - much, for instance, as I often find myself agonising over whether my latest redpoint project is 3c, 3c+, or even (gasp!) 4a. But I think we must be looking at different topos; apart from the last bit of pitch 9, pitches 23 and 24, and odd sections of 5.8/5.9, everything else seems to have a qualifying letter. Perhaps it's being updated as we type, and I didn't peer closely enough on first inspection.
Ah - my mistake; just realised you were referring to the summary pitch rating list, rather than individual pitch ratings on the actual topo.
Post edited at 12:53
1
In reply to Stevie989:
Has Jorgeson suggested that he no longer intends to try it? It's still an option for him, one would think, but he presumably wants to do pitch 15 first; the fact that Caldwell has done the by-pass version in the meantime doesn't really alter that. Unless, of course, he seconds it (Caldwell having already reached the top of the pitch via the by-pass) in which case, arguably, that wouldn't be the "proper" route. It's an interesting point. Lots of routes have small variations in line, possibly depending upon which style of climbing suits which climber; they all tend to be regarded, however, as the same route. How big does a variation have to be for that to change? This is clearly a major variation - it appears to roughly triple the pitch length (or the opposite, if the by-pass becomes the standard route) - which must put it into the category of the Teflon Corner/Huber Variant pitch on the Salathé.
> So the dyno has been binned then according to latest reports?
Has Jorgeson suggested that he no longer intends to try it? It's still an option for him, one would think, but he presumably wants to do pitch 15 first; the fact that Caldwell has done the by-pass version in the meantime doesn't really alter that. Unless, of course, he seconds it (Caldwell having already reached the top of the pitch via the by-pass) in which case, arguably, that wouldn't be the "proper" route. It's an interesting point. Lots of routes have small variations in line, possibly depending upon which style of climbing suits which climber; they all tend to be regarded, however, as the same route. How big does a variation have to be for that to change? This is clearly a major variation - it appears to roughly triple the pitch length (or the opposite, if the by-pass becomes the standard route) - which must put it into the category of the Teflon Corner/Huber Variant pitch on the Salathé.
Post edited at 16:59
In reply to Ian Parsons:
I have t read anything about Kevin not attempting it. Just that Caldwell felt is suited the route better. Did Caldwell not struggle with the dyno pitch?
Also if this is a FA can the route not be whatever you decide?
I believe the loop pitch is nominally less difficult than the dyno pitch?
I have t read anything about Kevin not attempting it. Just that Caldwell felt is suited the route better. Did Caldwell not struggle with the dyno pitch?
Also if this is a FA can the route not be whatever you decide?
I believe the loop pitch is nominally less difficult than the dyno pitch?
In reply to Stevie989:
Yes - that's all quite correct. As far as I'm aware Caldwell has never been able to do the dyno, whereas he had separately redpointed all the other hard pitches; Jorgeson, though, has already done the dyno in the course of earlier practice, but I think regarded either The Molar (12) or the second traverse pitch (15) as harder - and possiblly hadn't actually redpointed them before (can't remember). So it's quite conceivable that when he gets on pitch 16 he'll opt for the dyno version that he knows he can do, rather than the longer and supposedly a bit easier loop - clearly still very hard - that is still, for him, untried. Which version - if not both - would then be considered "correct" would be anybody's guess, and most likely irrelevant; I'm sure that in either case, and for years to come, "if it was good enough for Caldwell/Jorgeson, it's good enough for me" will amply justify whatever route choice a subsequent ascensionist might choose to make!
Yes - that's all quite correct. As far as I'm aware Caldwell has never been able to do the dyno, whereas he had separately redpointed all the other hard pitches; Jorgeson, though, has already done the dyno in the course of earlier practice, but I think regarded either The Molar (12) or the second traverse pitch (15) as harder - and possiblly hadn't actually redpointed them before (can't remember). So it's quite conceivable that when he gets on pitch 16 he'll opt for the dyno version that he knows he can do, rather than the longer and supposedly a bit easier loop - clearly still very hard - that is still, for him, untried. Which version - if not both - would then be considered "correct" would be anybody's guess, and most likely irrelevant; I'm sure that in either case, and for years to come, "if it was good enough for Caldwell/Jorgeson, it's good enough for me" will amply justify whatever route choice a subsequent ascensionist might choose to make!
In reply to puppythedog:
If you're correct - (entirely likely as my head's currently buzzing with all this and things get lost in there!) - then what I wrote above clearly needs slight modification. My point, though, was that Caldwell appeared to regard the dyno as the biggest question mark for him on the planned route, whereas for Jorgeson that lay elsewhere. Perhaps, instead of "knows he can do" I should have written "appears to believe he has a better chance of doing, on this crucial occasion, than Caldwell did".
But it's largely guesswork and the assembly of multiple pairs of 2s in the hope that some of them will end up as 4s!
> I read that Tommy can't reliably do the dyno pitch.
If you're correct - (entirely likely as my head's currently buzzing with all this and things get lost in there!) - then what I wrote above clearly needs slight modification. My point, though, was that Caldwell appeared to regard the dyno as the biggest question mark for him on the planned route, whereas for Jorgeson that lay elsewhere. Perhaps, instead of "knows he can do" I should have written "appears to believe he has a better chance of doing, on this crucial occasion, than Caldwell did".
But it's largely guesswork and the assembly of multiple pairs of 2s in the hope that some of them will end up as 4s!
Post edited at 19:02
In reply to Ian Parsons:
I agree with, at the very least your sentiments, and my comment was not a challenge to what you said. What baffles me is the criticism/critique which is levelled, the job is not done, it is ground breaking and I also can't think of anyone more individually placed to comment upon big walking in Yosemite than Tommy Caldwell.
I agree with, at the very least your sentiments, and my comment was not a challenge to what you said. What baffles me is the criticism/critique which is levelled, the job is not done, it is ground breaking and I also can't think of anyone more individually placed to comment upon big walking in Yosemite than Tommy Caldwell.
In reply to puppythedog:
Don't worry - what I say often needs challenging! In a situation like this I find it's very easy to hoover up a load of details, only to forget some of them when putting finger to keyboard.
I would entirely agree with you as far as criticism is concerned, although I think there's been very little from within the climbing world; it's mostly the fairly typical uninformed stuff in the comments sections of national media - augmented by the inevitable confusion over climbing terms. Along with most climbers, I suspect, I'm completely with you; when finished this route will be a quantum leap over what went before, and the protagonists are overwhelmingly qualified to be making any decisions about style that such an endeavour might require. In fact the route so far is already incredible, believe me; having done Mescalito back in the mists of time I know just how impressive free-climbing some of those pitches is.
Critique - if I correctly understand the term - is a rather different matter; to me it's not necessarily critical (in any adverse way) but is an inevitable and entirely understandable poring-over of the details when a bunch of very excited enthusiasts get together to witness unfolding before them what is - as you correctly say - a groundbreaking achievement.
I love the typo at the end of your post; it stirs an amusing recollection. Due to a slight misunderstanding/mishearing, I was once approached by a mountaineering club to give an illustrated talk on "Big Walks in Yosemite"; on learning that all my slides actually depicted the vertical variety they rapidly lost interest.
Don't worry - what I say often needs challenging! In a situation like this I find it's very easy to hoover up a load of details, only to forget some of them when putting finger to keyboard.
I would entirely agree with you as far as criticism is concerned, although I think there's been very little from within the climbing world; it's mostly the fairly typical uninformed stuff in the comments sections of national media - augmented by the inevitable confusion over climbing terms. Along with most climbers, I suspect, I'm completely with you; when finished this route will be a quantum leap over what went before, and the protagonists are overwhelmingly qualified to be making any decisions about style that such an endeavour might require. In fact the route so far is already incredible, believe me; having done Mescalito back in the mists of time I know just how impressive free-climbing some of those pitches is.
Critique - if I correctly understand the term - is a rather different matter; to me it's not necessarily critical (in any adverse way) but is an inevitable and entirely understandable poring-over of the details when a bunch of very excited enthusiasts get together to witness unfolding before them what is - as you correctly say - a groundbreaking achievement.
I love the typo at the end of your post; it stirs an amusing recollection. Due to a slight misunderstanding/mishearing, I was once approached by a mountaineering club to give an illustrated talk on "Big Walks in Yosemite"; on learning that all my slides actually depicted the vertical variety they rapidly lost interest.
Post edited at 00:48
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...