In reply to Offwidth:
Since I have (with one dubious exception) never managed to climb anything harder than 6a in Font (or elsewhere? and then only very few), you may be correct and if I climbed the harder grades perhaps I would see that the grades there were much less variable. I would certainly agree that most grades are at least +/- 1 number grade (arguing over the details of '2c+' vs '3a-' is obviously nonsense!). But even assuming that all grades in the Forest below 6a are complete rubbish, the problem isn't with the grading system itself but with the ability of climbers (usually better climbers?) to grade problems that are 'easy' but are often polished in the popular areas (often making the slabs a nightmare!). The grading system is just a series of numbers after all...
The British trad solution seems to simply be not to bother grading anything below 4a, and it is still often difficult to tell the difference between 4a/4b. I often ask myself where the crux was on a 4b pitch and have no idea; how can I then argue what is the hardest move?
Is it better just not to bother trying to grade stuff below Font 4? Is stuff that 'easy' just too difficult to grade for a grade to be meaningful? If you can, then Font grades are a better grading _system_ to reflect that, as you can split the lower grades (although I would suggest just f1, f2, f3, f4, f4+, f5, f5+ would do).
Next time I go to Font I'm going to try and do a circuit and estimate grades myself, and see how badly they correlate to the actual grades. I am fully prepared to find out the grades are rubbish
Post edited at 18:32