UKC

I notice from the preview to the forthcoming BMC Limestone guide that Scoop Wall (E2 5c) is being given E3 in the new book.

http://www.bmcshop.co.uk/images/PLN%20sample%20spreads.pdf

Initially I thought this might be a joke, but it does turn out to be a real suggestion. This is not a reflection on the book at all which looks like another excellent offering from the BMC, but mucking about with grades like this does cause problems (especially for guidebook writers and Logbook moderators).

Firstly it flies in the face of general opinion - http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=11497
85 out of 94 votes for E2 and below, that's 88% !!!

Secondly, and more importantly, it is a key Peak Limestone route and one by which other grades are defined. If Scoop Wall is given E3 it messes about with the grade boundaries which has knock on effects across the whole of the Peak. Giving it E3 would be like giving Bond Street (HVS 5a) E1, or London Wall (E5 6a) E6 - it has repercussions for all the other routes around.

Does it mean E3 for Darius (E3 5c), or for Dies Irae (E2 5c), because they are both harder than Scoop Wall?
Does it put Scoop Wall in the same bracket as Lyme Cryme (E3 5c), Queer Street (E3 6a) and Splintered Perspex (E3 6a) or are those going up to E4 since they are more than just a little bit harder? And if they go up to E4, that would make Mortlock's Arete (E4 6a) E5, and then of course The Golden Mile (E5 6b) E6!

Going back to the 1970s Scoop Wall was the route used to define E1 as other routes at Stoney were used to define their grades in the blue Northern Limestone guide. Grade creep has already nudged it up to E2 and now attempts are being made nudge it up to E3. Will it stop there?

The knock on effect from actions like this are quite significant since people use classic routes to define grades. That is why Three Pebble Slab (HVS 5a) and Flying Buttress Direct (E1 5b) are so useful. They are classic routes that define the barrier between HVS and E1. Scoop Wall isn't even close to being such a barrier, but it will become one if a guide is published with this grade, and when that happens the barrier between E2 and E3 will shift in some climbers' perceptions. They will then vote on other routes based on how they compare to Scoop Wall and the whole process of grade creep will have been fed.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

All sounds a bit dramatic Alan. Have you emailed Grimer?

In reply to John Roberts (JR):


Yes, and he has replied saying that it is what the (2) authors think it is. I just wanted to open up the discussion a bit more since I suspect that there won't be much support for the E3 grade amongst most climbers, and I am all for nipping grade creep in the bud where possible.

Alan

PS. I admit that in the grand scheme of World events this isn't very significant, but I have been battling grade creep for years and this is the sort of thing that really throws a spanner in the works.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Unusual for well protected routes to get upgraded unless some or much of the in-situ gear has gone I don't see why Scoop Wall needs this unless it's just to get people talking. It's certainly not as hard as something like Adjudicator Wall or Mad Dogs & Englishmen which I'd say are standard E3s. It's not as hard as Alcasan either!

Bold routes seem to get upgraded these days, possibly due to people not doing them as often so aren't prepared for the mental control.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Did it in 2013, felt like tough E2 then, definitely not E3. I haven't voted on grade but agree completely with general opinion in UKC database/logbook.

Thanks for the old Northern Limestone guide by the way Alan, have enjoyed a lot of good days out with it and it's still going strong.

PS is Grimer wanting you and YMC to upgrade all the E2s and E3s at Malham / Goredale as well?!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Doesn't it depend on how much in-situ tat there is on it. I know Adam removed a lot a couple of years ago, so unless it has all crept back then it would be fair to assume that most of the votes related to when it was (allegedly) a clip-up.

I've never even tried it, even at my best E2 was always at the top of my range. But I do remember looking at it when I abbed down after leading Armageddon (also E2) and thinking it looked a lot harder (even with the tat in).

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax: The rockfax voting system is far from perfect. If a route is given E2 and someone finds it harder than that there is a tendency to vote for the hard E2 option, whereas a route given E3 that you find easy you might think you were on a good day and opt for easy E3.
Its harder than Helicon which your voting system gives E3.
If Scoop Wall was in Pembroke it would have been graded E3 years ago.

In reply to Chris the Tall:


You could strip it of all the pegs and it would still be E2. Bombproof runners in the crack all the way up. A little strenuous to place in the middle maybe, but then that was why it was upgraded from E1 to E2. It is certainly not bold in any way.

Alan

In reply to Chris the Tall:

"Doesn't it depend on how much in-situ tat there is on it."
No it doesn't. I don't remember much about in-situ stuff except clipping a bit of something I wasn't completely convinced by and then placing my own gear anyway. Didn't climb like clip up in 2013, just a bloody good stiff E2

"I've never even tried it"
You've missed out then, get yourself on it when you're going well then come back and tell us what grade you think it is.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Hi Alan,

The really old Peak grit and limestone guides that I've inherited from relatives list a number of routes at the start that define 'typical routes' for the grades in the area. These are mainly oft-climbed, classic routes. That seems a good practice to me, and maintains a benchmark for others to follow. Perhaps that could be something that's continued?

I ain't climbed Scoop Wall, but agree with you that routes that have been around for so long, and climbed by so many people at a particular grade, should remain at that grade unless something drastically changes. For example, if pegs erode, holds fall off, of gear possibilities change for better/worse.

Do you not think that your argument (that changing the grade of one classic throws all the others out) could be applied to any previous Rockfax upgrades too though?

Danny

In reply to Martin Haworth:


Don't really see how this is an example of it not working that well. Yes, there may be a tendency for people to vote up routes they have a hard time on, and pass off as 'having a good day' on routes they cruise, but that doesn't show up dramatically anywhere and is easy to take account of. Also, that would only mean that this route is easier than the votes suggest.

The Rockfax/UKC voting system may not be perfect but it delivers lots of opinions and they tend to drop into nice bell curves much of the time.


In your opinion. What it shows is that 11 out of 19 people who voted think Helicon is E3 - the system may be mine, the votes aren't.

Alan

In reply to DannyC:


Almost certainly. I am looking forward to someone digging up some examples. I would be surprised if there was one like this though. We have played tennis grades with some borderline routes but we have kept Three Pebble at HVS for two guidebooks now!

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:



Maybe I'm misunderstanding grade creep, but I would have thought a route being upgraded because it's actually become harder isn't grade creep?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

While I'm usually happy to have routes I've lead upgraded, I don't think it's appropriate here. E2 seems very fair. Scoop Wall is a fair bit harder than the nearby Windhover, harder than Armageddon and Flakes Direct, and comparable to Alcasan in terms of overall difficulty, but still not E3 hard. It's super safe all the way, but has hardish climbing between good rests.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Have they done Our Father? Presumably that's gone in at E5

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

From the way you've laid out the argument for keeping it at E2 (though the route was substantially above my leading ability), it seems they are clearly making a huge and foolish mistake that flies completely in the face of consensus opinion.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

There have been routes that were obviously wrongly graded but those have all been sorted out these days especially since most areas have been through several guidebook editions since the adjectival/tech grade was adopted. Occasionally holds and gear disappear but apart from that there's no reason to change grades.

Like you, unless something is seriously wrong then leave things as they are, it may be boring but it's the sensible course to take.

I was trying to come up with an example of a route that was badly graded and the only one that came to mind is Death Star on Pavey - it used to get E2 5c. "Death" is an apt description: tricky 5c moves 20 metres up with one poor RP for protection. It's E5 5c now.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Solid E2 I seem to remember but using BC's E point law you take the highest grade on offer, bank the points and the points are retained , whatever happens to the grade thereafter!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

A memorable experience on Scoop Wall: youtube.com/watch?v=pf_SQTylXg4&

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

This is great news. It means I have done my first e3 of the year as my second route of the year. I did it a couple of weeks ago.

But really it did not feel e3 to me. In fact I did dead banana crack straight afterwards and that felt harder and it is e1.

It did feel quite a soft e2 to me. it should definitely be kept at e2.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:


Well that happened a long time ago, and it may have also been because the initial calibration of grades in the 1970s was a bit harsh. E grades were first introduced in the mid 70s in the Peak guides and the routes at Stoney were the initial benchmarks. Almost without exception those 'benchmarks' are now the next grade up - Our Father E3, Wee Doris E3, Scoop Wall E1.

So a bit of grade creep, and a bit of rationalisation.

Alan

In reply to Tom Briggs:


It would cascade downwards on the lower grades too. Mani would then have to go up to E2 and then Padme and Mortuary Steps to E1. And then that would mean Aurora would have to be HVS.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Haha, I'm sure there will be old Rockfax guides getting well thumbed as we speak!

Great Buttress at Dovestone Tor is the one that springs to mind in my fairly old copy of Peak Grit East, although admittedly it must be towards the top of HVS (but I can certainly think of harder HVSs in the Peak). Looks like it might have been downgraded in more recent editions.

I absolutely agree that there's a lot to be said for keeping established classics at their grade. Even the tougher ones, like Altar Crack, The Vice etc.

Danny.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


I think it would be better to designate certain routes as the borderline, the demarcation point, rather than trying to say it's one thing or the other.

In other words TPS is neither HVS nor E1 (nor E0, lets not go there), it's the boundary post. If a route is harder than TPS it's E1 or above, if it's easier it's HVS or below. Declare your borderline routes at the start of your guide - pick popular ones such as Sunset Slab for VS/HVS - and people have a good reference point for what the grades actually mean.

Unfortunately, though TPS and SS are among the most argued over routes, and very popular, they require a particular trait - boldness - so are perhaps not the best benchmarks.

In reply to Chris the Tall:


I think this is an excellent idea, possibly with a special designation, like a double forward slash, e.g. HVS//E1 Examples being TPS and Cemetery Gates. Though former with modern gear in that pocket and modern boots should prob remain at HVS. Not sure about Sunset Slab either, being a mite easier than Knight's Move which everyone seems to be agreed on as yardstick (very) bottom end HVS. (In which case Altar Crack is definitely HVS)

The File VS//HVS ??


Last time I walked past SS, the v competent leader had no less than 7 pieces of good gear on it

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Its your guidebook,Alan ! Give it E2.


When I was working on some FRCC guides it was noticeable how only popular routes got upgraded when you asked for feedback. If I hadn't ignored the feedback to a certain extent, some old school VS 's would have felt harder than some E2's. In my first guide, I was maybe a bit harsh and a lot of routes went up a notch in the next edition ( but better than three out ).

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

The File is just middling VS, Altar Crack is desperate but I still find HVS's in that style to be much more desperate, so it's probably fair as a top end VS

In reply to Chris the Tall:

PS. with the // borderline grade (quite rare), I think it would help if, in the introduction to any guidebook using it, it simply pointed out that these routes have a long history of argument and disagreement about the grade attached to them. I.e. one could cut out the apparent mystery about the grade by presenting it, truthfully, as an unresolved historic controversy.

In reply to LakesWinter:

The File suits my big hands so I find it standard VS hand crack.

Altar Crack feels VS+ 4c to me if I jam it. I have never dared to try laybacking, I'd rather do Scoop Wall.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


This highlights the point I was trying to make about the voting system. I would wager that most people who have done Helicon and Scoop Wall would say Scoop Wall is harder.

In reply to Bob:


Can't remember much about Alcasan but totally agree re AW and MD&E. E2 feels right for Scoop Wall; E1 and E3 both feel wrong. Good old-fashioned effort gets you up it.

Mick

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


As someone that's hovering around the HVS/E1 area I agree this would be bloody useful!

Generally find that everyones suggestions on a 'benchmark' E1 seems to vary widely (due to area, size, shape, number of pints, if theres ladies present as they tell you about it), so guides having a small group of 'transitional' routes agreed on (by the majority) would be handy.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Although I am with you on the general point of setting top end markers for classics both Rockfax and the BMC have been guilty of ignoring this useful maxim at times. I think both are generally better than some guidebook producers elsewhere (the worst example I know is Bowfell Buttress now recently upgraded to HS)

IMHO UKC grade votes cant be trusted to almost half a grade even on some of the most popular VS climbs on Stanage (the easy VS classics are all mid-grade on votes) so your faith on the accuracy of the average of a borderline limestone E2/3 is rather odd. All sorts of biases affect UKC voting, and like Martin rightly points out there are borderline routes that are almost certainly the wrong way round as judged from onsights by the same experienced leaders, in good conditions, at roughly the same time. What you need to do to improve the database is attach votes to names, like they do on Mountain Project.

In reply to Offwidth:


I am not putting faith in the accuracy of the average of a borderline limestone E2/3. I'm putting faith in a route where 88% of the votes think that it is E2. It isn't even close to borderline. Also, I am not just basing this one on the votes.

Explain how your lack of faith gives a more accurate assessment of the grade of Scoop Wall.

Alan

In reply to Martin Haworth:


Not this one, although Helicon may be generous at E3. Doesn't make SW E3 though. That sort of logic just feeds grade creep.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

>


interesting how you use those 2 routes in your arguement, yet in my peak pocketz guide book (rockfax) both are HVS and on here both are E1 so there is clearly no consensus on the HVS/E1 boundary even within the rockfax/ukc hierarchy!

In reply to Webster:


TPS is now HVS in the Rockfax guidebook and has been since 2006. The moderator must have set the UKC grade to E1 but the actual grade displayed on the route is HVS - http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=10925

(It does display as the UKC E1 grade in your logbook due to a tricky technical problem we currently have resolving RF and UKC grades).

I have always thought Flying Buttress Direct is HVS but we have had to go with the votes on that one now in the latest book.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I'm just saying you can't trust those votes. The average for the route is hard E2. IMHO hard for the grade routes tend to get undergraded compared to popular soft touches on UKC. Partly this is by lacking the aspirant votes . Also just being given a grade biases route votes to that grade. If Scoop Wall, was reset at E3 the votes would soon likely agree even though the route won't have changed at all. This happened with FBD which is now at E1 with votes that agree but was previously top end HVS with average votes that agreed. Base the grade more on the view of climbers you trust, not so much on the votes. Add user names like Mountain Project so you can see who is consitently trustworthy who grades soft or hard and who is clueless.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


I just noticed this with a route at Robin Proctor's Scar. It's 6a in the Rockfax and on the UKC database, but displays 5c in my logbook.

In reply to Offwidth:

Hi Alan,
I tend to agree with Offwidth.
It interesting how you the stats based on only 280 ascents ( a representative sample?)...of which the majority have polled "hard E2".
Then when you read through the comments..hows many "flashed" the route?
Also rockfax described it as "the best route at stoney" was that subject to a poll?...or was this just subjective?
The route has slowly metamorphosed over ther years with the amount of "fixed" gear, loose holds, polish and whether you split it at the Our Father cave!
If your concern is grade creep, then I am fully supportive, its just a pity you havent been more forthcomming in the past and championed your cause.
However, I am just a little personally concerned that this just maybe a little "dig" at the new BMC guide prior to it been published, as so it could become the Peak limestone guide everyone wants to have for many years into the future.
Finally, it is a "guide"..you may have bad days out in peak( or elsewhere), or good days...commenting at at the end of the day..."never E3 that"....or " that VS gave me a right good spanking!!"..we all have our strengths and weakness and thats whats fantastic about our passion of climbing
Cheers

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


I was standing under the File just 90 minutes ago, although it's years since I did it. But I remember it as being rather mainstream VS... trying to think of a good nearby example of tougher routes for that grade - something Sister on Stanage, errr... this one! First Sister (VS 5a) Did Crew Cut at Millstone the same day as I did the File and that's harder!

In reply to Rick Graham:


Altar Crack is very high on my "now I live in Sheffield, some burly classic VSs I really must do" list and you're all scaring me!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

What I think would be good regarding the voting, is to be able to see what you voted, and also change it at a later date. I'm sure most people change their minds when they repeat the route or gain more experience.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:


In recent weeks I've been noticing that loads, what comes up on UKC photos of routes also bounces around. I soloed Loki's Way at Higgar, that seems to be both HS 4b and S 4a on UKC. Did Pisa on the Tegness Pinnacle last weekend and that might be HVS 5a or HS 4a, depending where you click on UKC. It's all very Schrodinger's Cat isn't it? Although, worryingly, doesn't that suggest it's only when we fall off, that we will truly find out what grade a route is?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Scoop Wall, Alcasan, Dies Irae - all fair at E2. Mortlock's Arete I found desperate and wouldn't argue with E5. Then again, Peaks limestone grading is often harsh (certainly compared to Pembroke), let's keep it that way!

In reply to Offwidth:
Perhaps, but I'd still say the opinion of a few dozen people on the logbooks is statistically valid, so if most people are saying hard E2 or whatever, that's likely to be the right grade. I don't always agree with the majority vote but in an individual's case a lot depends on personal strengths and weaknesses, how many grade you've got in hand and how you feel on the day. Whereas over a sizeable number of votes the individual factors smooth out.

In reply to TobyA:


OK - fact that I can't remember too much about it, except I liked it (even better than expected) suggests it can't have been too bad. So agree, leave as is. Though prob VS 5a.

>trying to think of a good nearby example of tougher routes for that grade - something Sister on Stanage, errr... this one! First Sister (VS 5a)

Oh yes, indeed

>Did Crew Cut at Millstone the same day as I did the File and that's harder!
We didn't seriously think of trying it in days before Friends.

In reply to Misha:
Statiscally valid??...next time you take any medication from your gp , just think about the trials it been through?
but we dicussing a "guide" book
Dies Irea....E3 in my opion
Mortlocks never E5..even with the top pitch!!
Thats why it called a "guide book"!!!!!!

In reply to astley007:
I'm not being scientific about it but a few dozen logs is a fair sample to my mind. Bear in mind that's out of the population that has climbed the route. That might only be say a thousand people. Don't want to get into a debate about it as I'm not a statistician so what do I know... Grades are not precisely measurable anyway. If they were, there would be nothing to argue about

In reply to Offwidth:


Curious logic. Are you saying that routes that are voted high in the grade on UKC are all worthy candidates for upgrading? If so then that is one hell of a lot of routes, especially if you are using the 88% threshold on Scoop Wall. Would 89% be good enough to keep it in the grade below?


Not true. The Rockfax grade changed 2 weeks ago - http://www.rockfax.com/databases/r.php?i=873


Actually the main reason I think Scoop Wall is E2 is because I have done it 4 times over the last 30 years and never doubted the grade. In fact I first did it at E1 and thought that it was a bit stiff! I have also spoken to half a dozen extremely experienced climbers over the last few days and they have all agreed that it is never E3. In fact this thread appears to be devoid of staunch supporters of the E3 grade.

The votes are a tangible show of climbers' opinions. They may not be perfect, and some of the reasons you mention are certainly valid, but to change a grade of an established classic, you need to have good reason. Show me some good reason other than, "I don't trust Rockfax/UKC votes so much that I will completely ignore them".

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I think you missed the point I was trying to make, which was about the limitations of your voting system which you were trying to use to justify your rant.
I think both routes are E2, but Helicon gets voted E3 because that is the current grade it is given, and Scoop wall gets voted E2 because that is its current grade, people tend to be conservative when voting and so stick within the bell curve of votes, so the fact it's voted E2 on UKC doesn't mean it's E2.
My theory says that if you change the grade of Scoop wall today on UKC and give it E3 and clear all the existing votes, then in a year or so the average voted grade will be easy E3.
That is despite it being an E2!

In reply to Offwidth:

This is similar to the point I was trying to make, if you tell people it's E2 they will tend to vote E2.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Alan,
4 times in 30yrs.....thats once every 7.5yrs?..unless you did twice recently?
Unless I want to misquote " there are lies, damn lies...and statistics"
Cheers

In reply to Martin Haworth:

I haven't done Helicon in ages so can't comment accurately but it certainly wasn't desperate and it could easily be worth E2. The votes indicate it is very borderline.

As for people voting routes to the grades given in the database; wouldn't that mean that all the routes eventually have voting bell curves that support they grade they are given? Not sure that is supported by the evidence since there seem to be rather a lot of routes that have votes indicating an up or downgrade.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

You're absolutely right. It's a good route to have as a benchmark E2 - fairly stiff and very well known. As you say, what grade does that make Darius, etc?

Of course, Scoop Wall is a bit harder than some soft E3s (e.g. Black Grub, especially with all the tat in) but that's what grades are like. If it had always been E3 then fine, but it hasn't, and it isn't.

Yes it might be E3 in Pembroke, but it's not in Pembroke, it's at Stoney!

In reply to Creedence:


I think that would be possible. We have done that for photo voting I believe. Good suggestion.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Would it make sense for trad routes though? Climbing a route multiple times gets further away from the onsight each time you do it.

In reply to Martin Haworth:


You're right to quite an extent. Humans are social animals and that means they don't like their opinions to be far out of line with "the norm" of what other people are thinking. They can be a bit out of line, but being a lot out of line can be discomforting to people.

There have been experiments done where a subject goes into a room full of people, who are all actors hired by the experimenter. The actors strike up a conversation, and all start agreeing on something utterly absurd -- say, that in the UK it snows more often in August than in February -- and you find that the subject starts agreeing with the majority, and starts doubting their own opinion.

For this reason, the display of current votes will bias a vote. The existence of a grade in the guide will bias the vote. One way to overcome the former would be to have the existing votes hidden until one votes or clicks a button to see them (though I can't think of an easy way to overcome the latter bias).

Anyhow, does anyone really think that Millsoms's Minion is harder than Hen Cloud Eliminate?

In reply to Coel Hellier:


I don't think that is necessarily a bad thing for climbing grades. A bit of a reality check before voting can make people view their own performance more circumspect. Having said that....


... I do agree that it would be more accurate if we hid the votes before people actually vote. The problem with this though is that the votes are also there as useful information before you climb the thing so they can't really be hidden.

I'll make the same point I made above though; if the databases are subject to this cluster voting back to the grade they are given, why are there so many routes where the votes don't agree with the visible grade?

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

It's E2. Dies Irae is harder, but is E2 too.

In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:
It really should be left at E2 in my opinion.. As already stated it would screw the grades up for the following routes if it was to go up to E3.. (And I have been up them all within the last year)

"Does it mean E3 for Darius (E2 5c), or for Dies Irae (E2 5c), because they are both harder than Scoop Wall?
Does it put Scoop Wall in the same bracket as Lyme Cryme (E3 5c), Queer Street (E3 6a) and Splintered Perspex (E3 6a) or are those going up to E4 since they are more than just a little bit harder? "

Not been up it but you could probably add Adjudicator Wall to that from what I have heard / seen.


Guide is looking good otherwise..

Oh and to add, Helicon is well soft and could be E2

In reply to the thread in general:
Going back to the original post do people (who've onsighted or tried to onsight it) think it's E2 or E3?

Not many posters on this thread have answered the original question and it'd be a shame for Alan and the BMC guide writers if this thread were to just deteriorate into another general discussion/bicker about the rights or wrongs of UKC/Rockfax and its voting system.

I don't know whether or not Scoop Wall is the best route at Stoney but it's certainly the best route I've done there by a considerable margin and in my view it's definitely E2 not E3, so I'd say Alan's guide/database is bang on with this one and Grimer's will be wrong unless he changes it before it goes to print, which I very much hope he does.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Scoop Wall - Definitive E2; keep it that way

While we are at it
Cemetery Gates - Definitive HVS

stop the grade creep

In reply to pacman:

E2. I prefer Flakes Direct, but perhaps just because Scoop Wall is so overhyped and when I finally got on it it just felt like an alright f6b.

In reply to TobyA:


I found Broken Crack (HVS 5a) at Froggatt quite vicious at the grade. VS in the BMC guide, HVS here.

In reply to Martin Haworth:


Bit of a tangent...This is a psychological bias known as the 'anchoring effect'. It's used to particularly profitable effect in auctions. Daniel Kahneman writes about this and other effects in "Thinking Fast and Slow".

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
But really the main issue with the BMC guide is that on the front cover photo Mina's hand looks well scary!

In reply to Coel Hellier

They don't, but one is at Stanage (so soft) and one is at Hen Cloud (so a sandbag) . As you know, that's just the way things are.....

In reply to pacman:

It's E2 for me, only done it the once.

Looking back I can't remember any of the routes I've done in the Peak being poorly graded, certainly I can't remember any "WTF was that about?" or "No way is that grade X" for example. Of course there may be the confirmation bias talked about above but when you are young you can be quite combative and prepared to speak out about things which I can't remember doing. I'm not referring to the Bancroft book of pain gradings BTW!

Sure there were easy and hard routes for the particular grade (Black Grub and The Beast at Beeston Tor are at opposite ends of the grade for example but they are both E3) but given that you are trying to fit a stepped system to a continuum this is always going to happen. Then of course you have the variation in how you are climbing on any particular day: there are days when everything seems easy and days when everything seems hard. This is why grades settle down as a consensus is reached - those variations get ironed out.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

>
>

Perhaps where folk don't agree it's where the grades are obviously wrong as opposed to borderline? Just a theory.

For borderline stuff the same route could well feel either hard E2 or low E3 depending on the grade given in the guide. In agreeing with low E3 you'd justify it by arguing e.g. 'a tricky sequence to onsight' while for hard E2 you'd argue 'tricky but well protected and not too long' etc
.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


Coming from the guy who thinks The Strand (*) is HVS.

(*) This isn't a personal opinion, I haven't done it.

In reply to Michael Gordon:



This may be true, but Scoop Wall isn't "borderline" - it is bog-standard limestone E2.


Chris (done it dozens of times)

In reply to Michael Gordon:


The thing is that a number of people have come up with theories on this thread as to why RF/Logbook database votes can't be trusted, but most of these theories are just speculation and aren't really supported by any real evidence. The fact is that the vote curves tend to be pretty good indicators of how hard a route is, they may not fully nail it, but they get close and, the more votes, the better it is. In amongst that we will all find voting patterns we disagree with, but that doesn't mean that the voting is wrong. It isn't an exact science so every route will have a range of opinion.

To change a grade of a classic route you need to have good reason and, neither the votes on Logbook, nor the replies to this thread, nor the recent history of the route show any reason to change the grade of Scoop Wall.

Alan

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:


it's easier than Batchelor's LH

In reply to Chris Craggs:

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Alan, thank you for your help publicising the excellent-looking new BMC guide.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

To me Scoop Wall should be a bench mark E2. Changing it to E3 is troubling (it's like changing Vector or Left Wall to E3.)

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Does this mean that the next edition of Western Grit will correct the grade of Maud's Garden, which you upgraded to Severe despite a significant majority agreeing with the previous grade?

In reply to Simon Caldwell:


It is in the Western Grit book at HVD. Not sure why the database had it at S. Now changed - Maud's Garden (HVD 3c)

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax: I don't think it's E3, but then Stoney's an interesting place for grades. Last week when you & I bumped into each other, we'd done Medusa (E1) but that's way harder than any E1s at Pembroke, Staden or Giggleswick for instance. We'd also done Bingo Wall (E2) & Kelly's Eye (E4) both of which felt pretty straightforward for their grades.

I'm not sure 2 people should have the say on grades for such a well established classic like that, but whoever they are they've done a massive job in writing up Stoney so they're perhaps allowed to be cheeky or fly in the face of popular opinion. Just because people don't like it don't mean they're wrong.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


So what is the evidence that the voting is correct?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I didnt want to give a statistics lesson but when you have sample values with a particular mean and standard, deviation you can define probabilities that the actual mean of a full population is a certain distance from the current sample mean. On your sample the E2 border is presumably about 1/6 of a grade above the current average (halfway between high E2 and low E3) and the standard deviation looks to me to be roughly similar to this. Hence there is a significant probability just on sample stats that the population average is E3. Add in the well known, scientifically proven, bias effects of voting on labels and the number of E2 votes will be too high.

I havent climbed the route or even seen anyone else climb it but would prefer it to be labeled as E2 given the views of those I trust who have. I think grade standards at borders help us define grades much more accurately than the inevitable greyness of statistical samples (and the historical chnges in 3PS and FBD stats have shown the difference due to the bias towards the current label) . Yet it takes a pretty high level of experience and skill (and denial of ego) to fairly judge a nominal onsight average without lines in the sand. The BMC have made mistakes on this as have Rockfax but we haven't had a Bowfell Buttress moment yet. You do produce a Pembroke guide where grades, are a little softer but if votes have to match approximately you have no choice as the Pembroke voting population is clearly softer.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


I definitely need to try that one again. Maybe when I've done it 10 times I can declare it as only HVS.

In reply to TobyA:

Either you grade for yourself and be a single sample or try and judge what you see around you. Your jamming skills are clearly better than your layback skills at VS so you need to adjust grade estimates accordingly.

In reply to Chris Craggs:
Is it bog-standard E2 when you've "done it dozens of times"? Looking at the comments a lot of people failed to onsight it, then did it easily second go. The grade is for the former onsight not the latter attempt.

I don't really want to get into an argument specifically about scoop wall but I do think people tend to vote on here with the consensus/modesty i.e give something "hard for the grade" when it's really "low for the next grade" and offwidth has explained that in terms of stats.

There is no evidence either way that the voting can or can't be trusted (tho there's definitely routes in the db that have more votes than there have been ascents). Alan, out of interest, can you filter the votes by location? Do you know if it's mainly non-peak climbers that have voted it as hard E2/easy E3? I do think the peak has a tendency for tough grading (both on the lime and grit), especially on routes that people declare as benchmark. I can think of a good few routes that would be the next grade up if they were elsewhere in the country.

In reply to John Roberts (JR):
On pure stats you can say its much more likely to be low E3 than bog standard E2 (ie mid grade) as we would be further in standard deviation terms away from the current mean. Of course what is meant by high E2 isnt exactly clear (I assumed grades were even spaced so went for the middle of the top third at 5/6 but even assuming 3/4 the bias factors would marginally favour low E3 over mid E2).

Mountain Project attaches your votes to your user name so you can tell from profiles and voting histories (on routes you know) who is more likely to be trusfworthy. I think this would be a very useful addition to UKC for those interested in grading as well as possible for future guidebooks.

In reply to Offwidth:


If I understand that correctly then the probability that it is E3 based on those votes is roughly the same as the probability that it is mid E2. ie. the standard deviation can swing both ways. This would also indicate that, since the mean is high E2, the probability that the route is E2 overall is higher than the probability that it is E3, with the bias taken into account?


Yes, I agree with that.

Alan

In reply to John Roberts (JR):


We do know who has voted since we prevent people voting twice on the same route, however we haven't got a system for analysing that and also, we don't demand people enter a location when they register so we don't have that data.

It would be possible to analyse voter patterns though and find out who was a serial over-grader, and who was a notorious sandbagger. Be quite a lot of work though.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Seriously, on the off chance you'd let someone non-rockfax have access to the logs database I would do it for free. Data analysis is the mainstay of my day to day job and having access to a dataset like the UKC logbooks would be so cool! A man can but dream.

In reply to Offwidth:

BTW, has there ever been a more absurd mistake in the UK history of grading than Bowfell Buttress at Hard Severe? I can't think of any.

In reply to Frank the Husky:

Knew a guy who warmed up for Wee Doris on Medusa.He thought Wee Doris much easier!
That was when Medusa was HVS...

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax

Of course its most likely that the grade is high E2 with that sample, allowing for bias, but there may be something like a 25% chance it might be E3 from a straight stats viewpoint. Why not make that chance 0% for an important grade standard? Use the votes but be aware of their weaknesses. When I grade I compare to such standards but if the standards are drifting we are starting to lose the plot (or in the case of Bowfell Buttress fully lost it).

In reply to remus:


I'll keep it in mind and thanks for the offer.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

A vote for tough E2 from me. I certainly founder it easier than Darius for example.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth and Alan

Talking of consensus of opinion. Check out Cameo at Wilton

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=17104

HVS doesn't seem to match consensus here. if it could be upgraded back to E1 before next Wednesday, that'd be great and get my year off to a good start, cheers.

In reply to alex:

Cameo (E1 5a)


Sorted.

On no, what have I done, upgrades on demand!!

Another strange one actually since the guidebook had it at E1. I fear that since this is the second route that this has happened to in Western Grit (2008), it means that we never updated the Rockfax database back then and that still has grades from the 2003 book. Unfortunately that is quite a big job.

Alan

In reply to alex:
Yeah, that's never HVS to onsight.

Certainly not E2 either, but does show you how a much more extreme example of the difference between the votes and a grade given by the guidebook authors.

EDIT: Spoke too soon...!

In reply to alex:

Hard to imagine a more definitive E1 5a than Cameo. The people voting for E2 should get a grip though.

In reply to AlanLittle:

If they had a grip, they presumably wouldn't have fallen off it.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

That's amazing. Cheers Alan, owe you a beer for that! Operation Cameo is a go.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


Only if the distribution of climber's opinions on the grade is symmetric - ie, it is equally likely that a climber considers it to be higher than the true grade as lower. I'm not sure that a rigourous statistical analysis is going to help you much with grade assignments in general, though...

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Scoop Wall = Top end E2 5c. Now Via Vita Direct (Ravensdale) on the other hand even though 6a is nails.... and should be E3 IMO. Didn't Johnny Dawes fall off it?

Are Pembroke grades soft? My felling is that there is always a bit more seriousness rapping into sea cliffs - even St. Govan's would be a bugger to get out of without a helicopter should you injure yourself etc...

In reply to planetmarshall:
As I said before, 'assignment' bias probably makes low E3 more likely than mid E2 (if you can regard the assignments as a linear evenly spaced scale). I suspect its not linear and evenly spaced as: I think more people vote mid grade than low or high; grades are not equal widths in terms of noticeable differences in difficulty (eg VS and HVS are quite wide, low E grades middling and HS quite narrow).

I think the database stats could be researched in depth and the results might even win a future ignoble.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:


I don't know but Mediator at Avon was once graded Hard Severe. It's now E1 5b....

In reply to abseil:
Its not about sandbags, its about modern grade pandering leading to the most excessively overgraded classic.

On sandbags Straight Ahead on Stanage went from Diff to VS (.... I think its HS) there is also an old VDiff on Gardoms that is now Extreme.

In reply to Offwidth:


OK, and thanks for your reply.

In reply to wolverine:

I think adding the considerations of exposure and escape is fair enough but when an unfit punter like me crushes at a particular grade down there and backs off loads at the same grade on Yorkshire or Moorland grit (where my experience of the rocktype is greatest) ...I'd say the comparitive grades are at least a whole level different.

In reply to Offwidth:
I never understood why simple 'exposure' should be relevant anyway to the adjectival grade. The issue of escape impact seriousness and commitment of course which is fair game.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
Further down the BMC preview we are told that Dragonflight, at E3, is a 'mid-grade' testpiece. Wow. Bummer. Is E3 now 'mid-grade'? Alan, can you do anything to stop 'mid-grade creep'?

In reply to wolverine:

That's a whole different debate - should routes be given an extra E grade (particularly when they would be top of the 'previous' grade anyway) because of the seriousness of the situation, such as having to ab in to a hanging stance, no easier escape route, etc. As opposed to the seriousness of the route itself - lack of gear, dodgy rock, etc. I don't think the situation generally merits an upgrade but some people would disagree. Not really applicable to Peaks Limestone though!

In reply to bullybones:

Well, it's not hard, and it's not easy. It's somewhere in the middle

In reply to Misha:


I'd say in theory, Yes, though of course in practice this has led to a lot of stuff being overgraded or just thought of as soft.

In reply to bullybones:


Depends how you define 'mid-grade'. If you meant halfway up the grade spectrum (from diff/v-diff to E11) then it would be about right. But more often it's thought of as being the next grade band after low grade, so to my mind about HVS-E2. I've seen some crags described as mid-grade venues when there's only the odd HVS and a lot of easier stuff which doesn't seem correct.

In reply to wolverine:


Via Vita Direct was one of my early E2s, hard moves, committing and exposed, I thought it was (like a lot of harder limestone) hard to read from what I can remember. Bang on E2 nonetheless, just like Scoop Wall. Dies Irae (which I've lays struggled with on the lower section) defines upper E2, all easier than Adjudicator Wall. I think that these grades work if you have done a lot outside and particularly in Limestone. Not so easy transitioning from the wall at F6b+, which is the cause of the grade creep pressure I think.

In reply to Jonny2vests:


Impossible to argue with that! I can remember looking up at it curiously before what must have been a very early ascent and asking Andy Parkin what grade it was supposed to be. 5b was the somewhat ambiguous response (HVS 5b? E3 5b??) At least the warm-up (Rabbit or Lapin) looked HVS - but looks can be deceiving. Heaving on loose flakes with no gear wasn't exactly my idea of fun. I note that they both now weigh in at E3...

Mick

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


If almost 2000 people have voted on TPS and the majority have voted it E1, why have rockfax got in their guide as HVS?

In reply to Steve Perry:


Well it kind of illustrates our policy quite nicely.

Firstly, as I mentioned above, Three Pebble Slab (HVS 5a) is a defining route, one that marks the barrier between grades, hence to slow down grade creep it is a good one to keep at the lower grade.

Secondly, our policy with the votes is to only go with a 2/3 majority for an upgrade. In this case the votes are just more than 2/3 but may not have been when we assessed it. It does go up and down over the years.

Thirdly, TPS is a strange route (and this contradicts point 1 a bit) since there are two distinct methods to do the route. One is obvious but tricky, the other is much less obvious, but is actually pretty straight forward IMHO. The BMC have this mentioned in their guide correctly although I think you should always grade for the easiest method even if it isn't obvious, hence our HVS grade.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:


I disagree. I think if the most people end up doing it the hard way, then grading should take account of that. A guidebook is exactly that, a guide that gives you some idea of how hard the route will be to onsight. If it fails to do that for most people, how does that help?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

If we're talking generally rather than about that route in particular, then we've had this discussion a lot over the years. The other point of view is that you have to grade for the easiest way as otherwise (when climbed well) some routes will end up laughably soft. But really it's something that should be assessed on a case by case basis, not dictated by a general rule.

In reply to Michael Gordon:


Maybe, but I never knew Rockfax graded for easiest sequence, and I wonder how that is rationalised with the voting. How do you know which sequence was used for each vote? I'd be interested to know what other guidebook writers do.


Depends how obvious the easy way is doesn't it? If there is a really easy way, but next to nobody finds it, then everybody thinks it's a sandbag and votes it up on the logbook. If somebody is clever or lucky enough to find a really easy way, and nobody else does, then it feels very easy for them, and they vote it down in the logbook. Eventually you'll get an overall picture of how hard it is for people on average. Seems to me to be the most useful information to have in a guidebook.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

A better way of looking at it is to grade for the likelihood of an 'x' grade climber getting up it - for trad grades this means onsight. Surely if loads of 'x' grade climbers can onsight it (regardless of sequence used) it's possibly 'x-1', and if few can it's possibly 'x+1'. Looking at particular sequences just complicates it unnecessarily. For sport grades it's a little different but only in as much as they're often graded for redpoints so the grade depends on how many can redpoint a route, regardless of sequence.

[I'm aware of Alan's concept of easier sport grades often being graded for onsight ascents but that's a separate issue.]

In reply to john arran:

That brings in the problem of what is an 'x' grade climber, something which everyone seems to define differently.

Also, where there's a hard crux (e.g. E2 6a or E3 6b) the majority of those happy leading at that E grade may well not manage it onsight.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:


I think this is a bit of a non-issue. For most routes, people do them different ways, and some people find some ways easier than others. These routes with a special easy way that everyone misses are mythical beasts, or at least very very rare.

In reply to Jon Stewart:


Welcome to UKC.

In reply to Michael Gordon:


True, but not really relevant in this case as it's a relative issue.


In which case it should be upgraded - but people seem to prefer such routes graded for practised rather than onsight ascents. Don't ask me why.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

This is a bit off-topic, but I remember asking Andy Pollitt about 25 years ago, around the time he'd done The Bells The Bells and other bold stuff, what is the most scared he's ever been? His answer was standing outside Stony Caf watching some bloke solo Scoop wall who was having a bit of a knee trembler!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Its not different methods on TPS in the BMC guide as much as different finishes. The traditional finish is to pad straight up the blank slab (low E1 moves at most but some think HVS) but if you sneak off left instead there are only a few moves with gear just below your feet until you reach easier ground... this is an HVS finish. Rockfax as far as I am aware grade the bold padding finish as HVS.

In reply to Offwidth:


Though it has to be said that "sneaking off left" is the natural line (going straight up and avoiding holds a little left is rather an eliminate frame of mind) and most people do the sneak-left finish.

In reply to Coel Hellier:

However a thread starts, it always seems to end with a discussion of the grade of TPS.

In reply to john arran:


Just to clarify, I was referring to routes with a short hard crux with bomber gear (as opposed to boulder problem starts). I think these are less likely to be onsighted but that's more a reflection on the nature of the route (safe but harder moves) than because they're necessarily undergraded. I wonder therefore if an 'x grade climber' is better defined by the standard at which they're happy attempting routes of all types (the above through to the very bold), as opposed to whether they actually manage to onsight them.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Which begs the question: Are routes in practice graded for "likeliness to be keen to try" rather than for "likeliness to get up onsight"?

Good observation.

In reply to John2:


Godwin's second law?

In reply to john arran:


Maybe the proportion of people who fall off a hard well protected route will be similar to the proportion who don't even bother to set off up, or back off, an easier unprotected one of the same grade.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

That would be impossible to quantify of course.

To be honest I think most folk grade routes based on 'that felt like an E2' with comparisons to other routes nearby to make sure. It's maybe only when there's a lot of disagreement over the grade that we have to consider the percentage managing to onsight it etc.

In reply to Coel Hellier:

I disagree. The finish was of its time... following the best climbing and is pretty much the obvious challenge once you are standing on the sloping, shelf. You can scoot off sideways on plenty of climbs and miss the point. The fearful finish left but I've watched more ascents than I can remember and it seems so even over my 25 years (with a slightly increasing trend to the padding finish) I certainly can't say which is the most popular. Anyone climbing it with the current BMC guide knows clearly its only E1 by the padding finish (but guidebook work elsewhere means I've watched less often since Froggatt was published ).

In reply to Michael Gordon:


Of course.


I agree.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

First off well done for bringing this up.

I haven't done Scoop Wall for many years but I always considered it a benchmark E1 5b, as did most other climbers at the time. It was easier than say than the nearby Dies Irae which was a bit harder at E2. Wee Doris was always a benchmark for E3. Are they saying Scoop Wall is now of similar difficulty? If so then fair enough, but it must have changed pretty dramatically from what it used to be.


Does it put Scoop Wall in the same bracket as Lyme Cryme (E3 5c), Queer Street (E3 6a) and Splintered Perspex (E3 6a) or are those going up to E4 since they are more than just a little bit harder? And if they go up to E4, that would make Mortlock's Arete (E4 6a) E5, and then of course The Golden Mile (E5 6b) E6!

Ultimately yes it does. If nothing is about grade creep it means everything, everywhere will eventually go up in grade. Personally I find it daft, but more importantly its confusing to continually alter the grading system in this way.

If guidebook writers feel they have to tinker with the grades they should make sure at least as many routes go down as go up. That would ensure they're not contributing to further grade creep.

In reply to stp:


Do you know that isn't the case?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

If it was the case there could be no grade inflation. Everything would average out.

Some years ago I checked out the grades of the new 2007 Stanage guide against my previous old guide, the 1983 one. 48% of routes had gone up compared to only 3.5% that had gone down. That's a huge difference.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:
I can't comment on scoop because I've never done it. For my lime growing up I was a Chudleigh bey. E1 was E1. E2 was E2. In the 80s.

The amusing thing for me that mocks all grades: a lad had had a trad crisis after a ground fall. I went out with him and last route of his easy trad I pointed him at Wall Corner at Burbage. I've done easier hvs than that hvd. Layback, heel hook, mantel and then half fingernail pulls... hvd?

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

One thing I haven't noticed in this thread is a significant 'about time it was upgraded'(any?) response.

In reply to stp:
We did this argument before. The increase in grades was due to the Stanage definitive guidebooks of recent times finally dealing with the mass of less popular sandbags and soft-touches (yes there were some). The classics changed little, since 83.

If you want to blame grade issues on Stanage (or elsewhere), including creep, the 83 guide and its predecessors (in common with guidebooks across the UK) were actually the worst offenders. Numerous crack and break climbs that had in 20 years gone from unprotected to safe should have gone down a couple of grades due to improving protection, but they didnt. Also the editors of the time stopped caring about the general accuracy of the non-classic sub extreme routes (at the grades the vast majority of climbers climbed). The modern gritstone guides are as good on the grading front as guidebooks have ever been with attention to detail and character across the grades. Also given guidebooks across the UK are creeping much faster, leave Stanage out of this please.

In reply to David Alcock:

Your doing it wrong if thats what you did!? Dead Tree Crack was the standard sandbag in that area, that was used to humiliate the unsuspecting, in the last series of guides. There are still some tricky VS micro routes around there even now.

In reply to all:

What are the comparative views on the Cave Crack upgrade?. This was 7th on the top of E2 graded list in Froggatt.

In reply to stp:


I think we got our wires crossed, I thought you were talking about the new limestone guide, rather than guidebooks generally.

In reply to Offwidth:

Yes, I can only assume so.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Here was the thread where I challenged the stats on stp's assersion last time. Only 18 out of 80 2/3star classics at Stanage changed between 83 and now. I still beleive we can only judge real grade creep on classics.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=599946&v=1#x7902561

In reply to stp:


It is a huge percentage and I'm not denying grade inflation, and I also think in an ideal world it wouldn't happen, but I would argue that a guidebook is primarily a tool that helps you get on routes of suitable difficulty. Which guidebook do you think gives a better overall picture of the relative difficulty of routes? Have guidebooks generally improved in that respect over time?

In reply to Offwidth:

I'm not trying to blame the Stanage guide any more or less than any other guidebook. It's just the one instance where I happened to compare the grades and I found the stats interesting. I see this very much as a global problem.

In reply to stp:

Then given we have done this argument before why didnt you admit the real creep percentage was about 25% (for starred routes in 83) and the other 23% was clearing out the no star sandbags. Stanage was terribly graded (and focussed) away from the classics in 83 and that was the benchmark year you chose. You also failed again to acknowledge that the 83 guide and its immediate predecessors were responsible for mass creep in what climbers experienced for the grades as many unprotected classic routes became protectable but their grades didnt change.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I am all for nipping grade creep in the bud where possible.


I am late to this discussion and don't really have the time to read all the many replies, so I am sure something similar to my example will already have been posted but here goes anyway......

On a recent return trip to the UK I visited an old favourite Yorkshire Limestone crag of mine to climb a few trad classics. I have all my definitive guides here in Australia and don't carry them back to the UK when I visit so I treated myself to the Rockfax northern Limestone guide to leave behind at my Mum's house and use whenever I return. So amongst the climbs we did was The Pusher. VS5a according to the Rockfax guide. I had a feeling that wasn't how it had been graded in all my other well worn guides (YMC and Constable). Forgot about it till I saw this thread and then checked it out. Birkett Constable 1990 guide gives it VS4c. Musgrove's YMC 2005 guide gives it VS4c. Both Rockfax and UKC databases show an overwhelming majority of voters giving it both VS and 4c. However, both databases give it the grade VS5a. Is that the kind of grade creep that narks Alan? I'm not sure who is responsible but maybe it needs nipping. I am sure there must be many, many such examples amongst the many many thousands of documented climbs here and elsewhere. I am not sure what raising it here is meant to achieve other than getting a personal gripe off your chest. Still, a popular thread that I bit into : )

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:


I suspect they're probably fairly similar. They're both mostly internally consistent. I used the older one for most of my climbing and when I bought the 2007 one it was obvious the grading scale had shifted. This was confusing because if say I wanted to try a route now graded E1 I wondered whether this would be E1 in old money or quite possibly only HVS. I ended up taking both guides out with me for a while because I wasn't used to the new grading scale.



Are they more consistent than they used to be? It's hard to say. I certainly had no problems with the old Stanage guide and as most of my grit climbing was soloing the grades were pretty important to me. But with more ascents, more time and modern communication I would expect that newer guides could and should be more consistent. But consistency can be achieved just as easily by downgrading routes as upgrading. If both are done in equal measure the grading scale won't shift in either direction.

There seems to be some kind of reluctance or fear to down grade. Are authors scared of being unpopular perhaps, were they to down grade a classic route?

Putting Scoop Wall at E3 doesn't seem like it would be consistent with other Stoney routes, even taking into account that many have been upgraded already.

In reply to stp:


Sounds a bit contradictory. If there was such a huge percentage of upgrades, why isn't there much difference?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:
The internal, grade consisteny in 83 good for starred routes but all over the place otherwise. I was using the 83 guide when I started and soon after, the 89 guide (which copied most, of the dafter sandbags) and even climbing cautiously got into trouble quite a few times. If, stp was onsight soloing around then and found things OK, that matched my only logical explanation for why no star routes could be graded so bad so often (without it being deliberate) that really good climbers just couldn't tell what grades should be sub-VS and if anything grades matched solo attempts better than onsight leads .

In the end grade creep of 25% (or less on the biggest classics) in 30 years at Stanage when grades crept more than 100% in the experience faced in the previous 20 years seems to me to show completely the wrong focus for concerns. The 83 guide and its ilk were also just not checked properly for no star routes, at the grades the vast majority of people buying the books were climbing. Its a lousy book, grade-wise, to be lauding. Thats not all the editors fault they had the volunteers they had and were towards the end of a period of huge change in equipment influence and you could argue trad lower grade was very much an apprentiship then for much riskier stuff in say the, Alps (so a 'school of hard knocks' served a purpose)

In reply to Offwidth:


What are you on about? I haven't mentioned starred or unstarred routes. Therefore it should be pretty obvious that this is for all routes.

In reply to stp:

What I am on about is that only starred routes should count when measuring meaningful grade creep. Common experince sets just do not occur across the UK on no star routes. The mass upgrading of no star sandbags at Stanage (and removal of the fewer soft touches) was just a realignment with the difficulty of the classic grade standards on the same crag. The real change at Stanage since 83 is better grading (the real creep is only around a quarter grade)

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:



Is that really how grades in guides get decided? Two people think its harder, therefore the grade goes up. Just how subjective can you get?

In reply to stp:

The two people are the editors. What do you think the chances are they made that decision without talking to or watching anyone else.?

Who decided for Cave Crack (UKC votes average top end E2 but now graded E3 and said to be upgraded by popular demand)?

Editors do make mistakes (I certainly admit I did but will leave it to others to find where) but the BMC and Rockfax Peak decisions (with a few exceptions) seem to me nothing like as bad as elsewhere, especially when we consider the worst examples like Bowfell Buttress.

In reply to Offwidth:


In your opinion. The claim that some routes are a sandbag is no more objective than 2 people saying Scoop Wall is the wrong grade.

But regardless whether the percentage of grade creep is slighter lower or a bit higher at Stanage makes absolutely no difference to the point I was making. You seem to like arguing for the sake of arguing. In the context of this discussion whether right or wrong your point simply irrelevant.

In reply to stp:

I've looked at the stats of all routes and decided to focus on the starred routes for good reasons, where common experiences exist to enable climbers to judge and where the dataset wasn't riddled with sandbags. You seem to be in denial that you have overstated the problem (for understandable reasons but explainably untrue).

One quarter of starred routes have increased grade at Stanage since 83. Thats an objective statement on a subjective subject that you raised in the first place.

The irony in this is I share your concerns about grade creep and would have urged both Scoop Wall and Cave Crack to stay at E2 until it looked like most climbers with direct experience of the routes felt otherwise.

In reply to Offwidth:

For the record from that other thread these were how the classics moved:

Since the 83 guide the following 2/3 star classics changed adjectivally (in four editions of the BMC guidebooks)

Goosey GG E4 to E5
Old Friends E3 to E4
Wolf Solent E3 to E4
Impossible Slab E2 to E3
Goliaths Groove VS to HVS
Not to Be Taken Away HVS 5c to V4 6b
Namenlos HVS to E1
Stanleyville E3 to E4
Balcony Buttress VD to S
Agony Crack VS to HVS
Left Twin Chimney M to D
Wuthering E1 to E2
RHRHBD S to HS
FBD HVS to E1
Kirkus Corner HVS to E1
Unprintable HVS to E1
Tippler Direct E2 to E3
Crack and Corner HVD to S

Which I make 18 out of 80 and in the graded lists most of those routes are low in the grade band so have shifted half a grade at most. Never mind the facts getting in the way of a good story though.


Just for the record the extra upgrades (on top of GGG, FBD, LTC and C&C) from '89 to the latest guide, in the 2 &3 star category, were:

Orang Utang E1 to E2
Crypt Trip E5 to E6
Weather Report E5 to E6
Silk E5 to E6
Indian Summer E5 to E6
Punishment E4 to E5
Curving Chimney D to VD
Wall of, Sound E5 to E6
Chameleon E3 to E4

The two down-grades were Green Streak to VS and Paradise Wall to HS.

All on 120 routes (in '89)



Simon Caldwell also made this point:

"Out of interest, here are the benchmark routes for Stanage from the 1963 guide, with their current grades from the 2007 guide.

Easy - High Neb Gully (Easy)
Mod - October Crack (Diff), Left Twin Chimney (Diff)
Diff - Broken Buttress (VD), Helfenstein's Struggle (VD), Physiology (VD)
HD (who said these 'half' grades were a modern invention?!?) - Overhanging Chimney (S 4a)
VD - Cave Buttress (S 4b), Wall End Crack (S 4b), Flying Buttress (VD)
HVD - Creepy (S 4a), Little John's Step (S 4b)
S - Marble Tower Wall (VS 4c), Paradise Wall (HS 4b), Robin Hood Zig Zag (S 4a)
HS - High Neb Girdle Traverse (not listed in 2007, HS 4b in 2002), Gargoyle Buttress (VS 4b)
VS - Right Hand Tower (HVS 5b), Milton's Meander (VS 4b), Inverted V (VS 4c)
HVS - The Blurter (HVS 5b), Right Unconquerable (HVS 5a), Kirkus Corner (E1 5b)
Extremely Severe - Quietus (E2 5c), Count's Buttress (E2 5c), The Tippler (E1 5b)

This fits in with my usual experience. After most crag visits, I look up the routes in my old guides to see what they say, and on average I'd say VD and below are a grade easier in the old guides (sometimes 2 grades in the oldest), VS is around the same, Severe/HS are all over the place."

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Hi Al,
this is merely a rounding error. Like the UKC database, the average grade was found it be hard E2 - which using the new BMC decimal grading system came out at 2.854521, which was the grade in the proofs. Don't tell me all the grades have gone in as one sig fig? Is Our Father not E4.276538? Typical BMC cockup!! Grimer must go

In reply to Graham Hoey:

Probably about the wisest words spoken on this subject for a while. Scoop Wall = E2.85, which means it's E2.

End of.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Surely unless holds or gear placements have broken off the grade should not change.

I think the problem is guidebook writers see themselves as authors and not auditors :P

In reply to Kemics:



Unless of course the original grade was 'wrong'.


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I see, Cave Crack was wrong (even though the vote average was the same as Scoop Wall). All this grade arguing is good for increasing awareness of both publications of course.

In reply to Offwidth:

You are correct. Cave Crack upgrade is silly. Scoop Wall upgrade is silly. Grade creep being justified left right and centre. F*ck it lets bolt the lot and chip some more decent holds so everyone can climb all the routes or else it's elitist.......................

In reply to LakesWinter:


I often wonder if all these routes get upgraded because they were previously under graded, or because modern 'wall bred' climbers don't climb enough proper rock to be able to make an accurate judgement.

Scoop Wall is E2, so is Cave Crack. People who think they're E3, need to reassess their climbing ability, not the route grades.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Hi Alan, hope you are having a good time in Finale.

Down to business, as leader of CamFAG (Campaign For Accurate Grades) I would formally like to form an alliance with CamReG (Campaign for Real Grades) over this issue. We have had our differences, but in this instance I wholeheartedly agree. Scoop Wall is a classic E2 and Dies Irae and Darius are harder!

We are only a small group of guerrilla graders but we will help in whatever way we can.

Dunc

In reply to Duncan Campbell:



Any anyone who has done all three would have to agree,

Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Well yeah, but Darius is E3 really!

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Not the end of the world if a route goes up one grade.Guidebooks are full of ''wrongly graded'' routes.So what.One or two routes that don't fit make no odds to the majority of grades.The grading system averages don't collapse because of a few anomalies.It will probably just be known as a soft touch at the grade.As long as a route is safe,then grading is for guidance.I had to dog out a hvs in Lancs recently.Harder than many classic E2's in Derbyshire.Deffo a sandbag.The question is,are you good enough to get up the route,regardless of grade.At a crag new to me,I often don't look at the guidebook,and guess at a grade before I set off on the route.Sometimes I wander ''off route''.Makes life interesting.My partner will say ''Do you want to know the grade?""and I usually say no. Mitch

In reply to Duncan Campbell:

Whats your view on Cave Crack? Or is guerilla grading about covert action then only talking about the crimes of the opposition ?

In reply to Offwidth:

Nah, I'm pretty sure Dunc is against the opposition too - See: the Pembroke Rockfax grading of Headhunter

In reply to snoop6060:


Not sure if it still is but I have a print out of an early draft the high tor section of the due to be released bmc guide and Darius was E3 in it.

In reply to all:

I haven't done the route in question but as this is UKC and I have stood underneath it several times in the past, I feel fully qualified to comment. Given that many limestone routes are dependant on the threads being in place, and I'm sure Scoop Wall is no different, I suggest the BMC establish a Tat Fund to be run in a similar way to the bolt fund to maintain garish tat all over our crags. This will ensure that classic routes like Scoop Wall don't require an upgrade, thus maintaining the important datums that keep our grading system correctly calibrated.

In reply to Chris Craggs:
Scoop Wall is a classic E2 and Dies Irae and Darius are harder!

Not if you cannot remember any of the moves


All I can recall is that DI was pleasantly unpolished. A local pointed out that that was because the holds kept falling off.

In reply to Offwidth:

cave crack at froggatt? Not done it my dear offwidth.

And in reply to guy, yes usually CamFAG and CamReG do not agree (jack and Alan are tall and talented - I am neither) on this occasion however I am willing to form a coalition.

In reply to Graham Hoey:



New BMC decimal grades, the FRCC were using that system in the 80's.

Now is Scoop Wall E3.01 or E 2.98 ?

or just old school mid E1 ( 1.500 )

In reply to Duncan Campbell:


Of course this brings to mind the famous (and often miss-told tale) of a meeting at the Norfolk Arms many years ago where Geoff Milburn tried to handle the various grade suggestions the manuscripts had thrown up by a show of hands (long before the Rockfax/UKC databases).

Cave Crack came round -
"HVS?" = three quarters of the assembled mass,
"E1?" = most of the the remaining throng,
"E2" = just two votes - me and Paul Nunn.

Slightly frustrated, Geoff tried again - "How many people have actually done it?" - you already know the answer!


Chris

In reply to Rick Graham:


...and it was fully endorsed by Rockfax with E2.5 for The Butcher in the Pembroke graded list!

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Heard that story many times ( and it's in one of the guides too) but always about Sentinel crack.

Cave crack is definitely harder than Cave wall, but then Cave wall is overgraded.

In reply to Rick Graham:


It's E2.68

In reply to Chris Craggs:
You sure that story is about Cave Crack?

The BMC always used editorial decisions from team experience to fix grades. What I wanted to know is how Rockfax came to upgrade CC, a classic hard E2 (according to the UKC votes). If you still make editorial decisions overruling UKC votes (where you occasionally think it is sensible) thats fine with me (as I've done the same). I'm interested partly as, for the same reasons Alan raised, I like top-end grade markers and happen to think CC is a useful top end E2 grade of its type. Yet in the big scheme (as Paul Mitchell pointed out ) there are more important grading issues than a hard E2 classic going to easy E3 and the overgrading on Peak grit remains trivial compared to some areas elsewhere.

In reply to Adam Long:

Is Cave Crack definitely harder than Cave Wall? It's certainly physically harder and adjectivally I think it probably is but we are comparing very different styles of climbing, boldness (and even potentially including ground up potential in the grade on safe physical fights). It seems to me fewer climbers are tackling low extreme crack classics these days (they were never the most popular!)... do trad climbers have a growing weakness in this area?

In reply to Offwidth:

Of course it is about Cave Crack - what kind of bizarre question is that?

Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Just that someone thought it was about Sentinel Crack...

In reply to jon:

Indeed, I have heard the story retold (wrongly) many times over the years by people who weren't there.

Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:
Hardly bizzare then if its a common misconception...anyhow thanks for clearing this up.. I'm a bit suprised so few had dlimbed it... Cave Crack is hardly a brute cf Sentinal and well within the ability of many of the team ( ....albeit a clear sandbag at HVS).

By extrapolation are you one of the few saying E3 when thats what you think it should be? (the answers to the question of why CC was upgraded is starting to look like David Cameron being pressed on where the welfare cuts will come.... and he has the excuse of having something to hide).

In reply to Offwidth:


I clearly don't have life...

Assuming (probably wrongly) that these data are distributed in a way that makes calculating standard deviation meaningful, and that grades are evenly spaced, I make the probability that the population mean grade for Scoop Wall is low E3 or higher to be a bit less than 1 in 100. Not making these assumptions (so using a "distribution free" test) then probability is even less.

i.e. on the basis of these data (and leaving aside issues about whether how they were collected might introduce bias) then if you got all people who have climbed Scoop Wall together and asked the what grade it should be then it's very unlikely indeed that the average of their responses would be E3 or higher.

In reply to Rick Graham:

HI Rick,

I'm currently scouring for a new line with an average grade of 3.1415926, no guesses at its intended name.

cheers
Graham

In reply to Adam Long:

Hi Adam,

Each to his own, and Cave Wall is pretty morpho at an unpleasant height. As young lads, (early 70s) we used to regularly solo Cave Crack, well before we were leading grit extremes because 'the hard moves were low down'. It was considered HVS then and no-one moaned!

cheers

Graham

In reply to Graham Hoey:


Oh yes we did!


Chris

In reply to Mark Torrance

I'm assuming that you assumed that the low E3 divider in your calculation is the middle of that low E3 band (ie the probability of being at least a full notch above its current average of high E2), in which case that's 1/6 of a grade higher than I did: E3 starts at the border of high E2 and low E3, half a notch above the current average. That might sound trivial but since 1/6 of a grade is around the same value as the SD (since you calculated it what did you get?) that would explain the big difference in our numbers. You can guestimate the bias due to an assigned grade label from previous data for top end routes that got upgraded (around 10% of the votes should probably be ignored, all at E2, before you calculate the mean and SD)

In reply to Graham Hoey:

I thought you were on that same BMC team as Chris?

I agree CW is morpho (and much more serious for those who struggle with the moves) but then how do we average for that on bold routes?

In reply to Offwidth:

Hi Steve,
you may not know this but most of the grades on my 1983 Stanage North script from me were upgraded very unfairly I thought (although I think a few managed to stay in until the last edition ).

I think grading for boldness when morpho is tricky - I normally point out that its morpho or harder for the short, easier for the tall etc (though this last comment can be written after most routes!), suggest a different grade. A mate of mine did a very early repeat of Nectar first pitch and he gave it HVS. He was tall and just bridged it all the way up. He didn't lead much more than that grade on grit either. I remember a top climber who was tall telling me that in all seriousness he hadn't made many moves harder than 5c and he was repeating top E5 6a/bs in the Lakes, Peaks and Wales at the time!
For each climber the grades are relative so the E3 they've done is harder than the E2 they've done, but not neccessarily comparable to the efforts put in by a shorter climber on the same routes. This is why Jonny Dawes' routes were often seen as overgraded. Climbers like him and Jon Read (for eg) are sometimes climbing two grades above that of a taller climber for a route of a particular grade. Some examples with height issues are EOTA (E6 to E8), Kaluza Klein (E5 to E8), Committed (E5 to E7).

The bigger issue is why some Hard Severe wide cracks are harder than E3 6a's?

I'll just get me' coat...

cheers

Graham

In reply to Graham Hoey:

Those morpho points would match my views.

As for '83 you can look at Offwidth to find our views, as distinct from the guidebooks we worked on (thats Moff and I and our partners ...mainly from our student club) but given our comparative lead grades (I've only ever really been a solid VS leader who occasionally led low extreme and got dragged up a few harder climbs) I think I'd argue my feel for sub VS stuff is likely better (I hear my pal Chris Fitzhugh was showing you the easy way on routes you thought we might have slightly sandbag graded on some Birchen easier trad only the other day . I think the topo guide and the 2002 guide did most of the no star grade changes ...thats before our BMC influence.

We did have the huge benefit for 'Offwidth' of climbing everything sub VS on Stanage in just a couple of years, usually several times, with onsight leaders with reasonable experience operating around the grade checked. Even so we still change stuff slightly, occasionally, based on feedback on the site.

In reply to Offwidth:

I hear my pal Chris Fitzhugh was showing you the easy way on routes you thought we might have slightly sandbag graded on some Birchen easier trad only the other day .

No, he did his party trick on a route I hadn't commented on. I'd said I thought the technical grades for some of the routes further left were incorrect e.g the starts on The Funnel, Emma's Temptation and Emma's Delight. I just use Froggatt slab tech grades as the standard for 4a, 4b, 4c. These routes all have moves as hard or harder than on Sunset Slab.

cheers

Graham

In reply to Offwidth:
I knew I'd regret this.

Sorry, yes, I get your point about boundary being halfway between high E2 and low E3. Testing the hypothesis that the population mean is greater than that boundary gives a probability of less than one in twenty. I make the sd 0.6* - so about what you said (but I think you have confused sample distribution and distribution of sample means when making your inference).

This isn't really answering the right question, though. We don't need to robustly reject the possibility that the population mean (average of all climbers' opinions) is greater than E2. The issue is simply which, on the balance of probability, is the most likely. And without any discussion of distribution, the answer is obviously E2.

NB: I see this as a contribution to statistical pedantry and not as input to what grade it should actually be. Also, this is post beer...

* where 1 = difference between high E2 and low E3 (and mid E2 and high E2, etc).

In reply to Graham Hoey:

As to your last, Bollard Crack gave me a spank yesterday. Just couldn't reach nor find an alternative method. And I'm not too bad at wide cracks. Ridiculous.

On the topic of 'morpho' for want of a more civilised term, everyone finds things easier or harder than the next guy. Reach, compactness, flexibility, balls and stupidity all have a part to play. Surely all a grade can be (when suitably averaged by repeats) is a guesstimate. Different folks and different strokes can experience two shifts up or down. At least.

At present under doctor's orders not to climb, I'm running at soft vs. Doesn't stop me having a mare on a weird vd nor cruise 6a English if it suits my condition.

To sum up, everyone brings a set of advantages / disadvantages to the crag. A grade is next to meaningless at the end of the day. The whole system needs taking with a pinch or several of salt. My e2 might be your e3 or hvs.

Ach. Whisky has been taken, following the Broady then the Beltane lot at the cemetery.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Apologies - just blathering. The girlfriend is trying to draw me.

In reply to Mark Torrance:
I was more probable than that on average but also tried to guesstimate the max possible probability it was E3 from various assumed max errors. Of course straight stats mean its clearly most probably E2 but if we do the same analysis on the easiest classic VS climbs at Stanage and look at the possibility they are borderline with HS on even larger vote numbers (experienced climbers know some are real easy VS), its hard to justify on pure stats even with extra bias from beginners flattering themselves. Hence I'm just not convinced grade votes are that meaningful. What they do seem to tell us on large enough vote numbers is a value at least within half a grade (so the new Bowfell Buttress grade is wrong).

May be rambling after half a bottle of excellent Ribera del Duero.

In reply to Offwidth:
Rather than benchmark grades, why don't we just assume that (for example) VS might meet E1 somewhere in HVS? That's how life seems to be. It keeps the essence of adventure, and (the HVS 5c stuff aside) is more accurate.

Obviously talking about grit. My point is that each grade will between a sandbag and a soft touch skip a grade. Think of them as overlapping with another grade centred midway. All this anal-ytics seems fruitless.

In reply to Graham Hoey:
The Funnel is top end for its grade (may be VD 4a weird bridging) but the warnings are clear and Chris C gave it Diff in Chatsworth. We upgraded Emmas Temptation to HVD and dropped the tech grade of the 4c start assuming you can reach (with an alternative advertised if you can't). You're the first to seriously propose Emma's Delight as 4c, maybe we need to look again. We did resist huge upgrades after downgrading 4 VS climbs that previously shot from VD and were the first to propose tech grades for all routes to try and show just how many of these lower grade routes have very tricky starts. The crux slab angle and style of moves on these routes has no relation to Sunset Slab crux that I can see.

Just to be clear, I'm not proving we are right ..... just trying to get close to an average for the wonderful world of varied climbers, from our own experience and the hundreds we watched on our crag.

In reply to David Alcock:
I think we can do a bit better than that but take your point on the borders being a bit fluid, even without looking at individual skills differences that may for example make an E1 easier than a HS. I also 'analysed' mainly to try and show just how pointless the stats and anaylsis are.

It was frustrating in the old guides to be spanked so regularly on easier routes where we were OK skill wise (pity the beginner on Straight Ahead at Diff) , yet at the same time to be able to boulder the crux and reverse it on Long John's (pre mats, so just two spotters) as we thought terrors must lay above to make it E3 (or even work the moves on Easy Picking, an E2 with a reputation). I didn't see why the lower grades needed such a hard time; even though at the E3 border I was more relaxed, as those with the experience and skill level to onsight such grades should have the ability to adapt.

Things are much better now but perfection is impossible.

In reply to Offwidth: I did Straight Ahead when it was Diff - many decades ago when soloing lots of the very "easy" routes at Stanage. My logbook notes "A little bastard. Prominent chockstones make it possible not just facilitate the ascent" - the 77(?) green guide must have had some comment about facilitate.

Funnily enough, I don't think I've ever repeated it.

In reply to Offwidth:

Thanks for that.

One that really sticks in the head is Hades. Hvs 5b or E1 5c? The 5c stuff is jamming your smallest fingers... I just remember the 20 foot fall twice when you discover.... not going to give info.

In reply to Offwidth:
HI Steve,

I do think height is an issue with these particular starts, but I think people always tend to undergrade starts because they are safe (despite this not being a factor). I think it's far better to think of the moves half way up a pitch and then grade them technically. I've been soloing a lot on grit recently and I feel the biggest problem is with offwidths (not you Steve!) where because of hand/fist/body size variations one man's HVD can be another's VS! I also wonder how neccessary both tech and adjectival grades are when grading offwidths, it almost sems to me you could get rid of one of them! You could probably set up a graded list of wide offwidths for each chest size!
Something to discuss over a few pints maybe?
cheers

Graham

In reply to Graham Hoey:
We do grade a bit lower for hard first moves (or first moves off good ledges) as that's how people climb: on the route, the ground you stand on comfortably and move freely on and can push off is missing.. The same move in balance on a route doesn't allow as much playing around with position or (confident) use of momentum. The purist might well turn a 4b start move lunge into a 5a static balance move. Yet if lunge (or some other cheat trick) won't work to defeat the 5a move, the grade needs to be that. Emma's Temptation's 'official' start is 4a for the tall and possibly 6a for the very short and rather than argue some artificial average we said 4b or bypass. The bypass is hardly out of character ..routes to me were always about the easiest way up a piece of rock (unless strict rules are in the text). As for The Funnel welcome to the world of the Diff climber! The old joke that VDiffs are VS climbs with ledges had much truth to it in the days of tweed jackets and combined tactics. Climbing with Moff as my main partner is illuminating... people get all excitable about reach on some routes and completly forget it might be an issue with others.

When you try amd climb everything at a crag at particular grades on grit, offwidths can become a bit of an obsession, as they all seem different and require some clear effort or skill and hence are memorable (when many other climbs can blur from similarity).

In reply to David Alcock:

We have Hades as E1 5b on Offwidth. The lack of polish for a 2 star quarry HVS is a big clue.

In reply to Graham Hoey:






You just need to find a potential E5 and chisel it to the correct grade so you can call it "Pie and Chips"

In reply to Graham Hoey:


Partly because they are safe and partly because you can "work" the moves without blowing the onsight. (Oh yes you can, for anyone about to contradict me!)

For those reasons it's un-written law of guidebook writing that the bottom 4 feet don't count towards the grade. Thus the bottom of Crack and Corner is harder than anything on, say, Death and Night and Blood or on Millsom's Minion.

Scoop Face at 5a in the current guide (5a??, ok, it is once you're 4-ft up!), Greengrocer Wall (6a, unless tall), and Desperation (solid 6a start) are examples of routes where the tech grade has traditionally been too low.

In reply to shark:
So what are you suggesting...? http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=70645

In reply to Coel Hellier:



Inconsistently applied though.


I think you're doing it wrong. It's fine 5c the way I do it (undercut fingerlock RH, pull on to gain good edges for both feet facing R, jug in easy reach from undercutting the crack).


Maybe. "More like" 6a rather than "Solid" IMO.

My favourite of this genre is Bert Wells (f5+) where getting off the ground is 6b!

In reply to Coel Hellier:

Dont be ridiculous. Crack and Corner, Stanage has some toughish 4b bridging avoiding the most polished bits. The Roaches version is 4c wide bridging (or pretty, standard easy 5a jams). Neither compare easily to the harder 5a/b arete moves on DaNaB (which are really desperate for the short).

In reply to Jon Stewart:

5c for GW and Desperation for me.