This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Inspired by an opinion expressed in another thread, and posted here so as not to derail that one: Is setting that emulates rock necessarily the ideal?
To my mind it's generally quite good, in that whenever I see a route/problem that simulates tufa climbing, jamming, etc. I give it a go (and generally quite enjoy it), but these are outliers - is that due to cost (huge tufa-style holds are expensive), tastes (most indoor climbers don't enjoy jamming, or often don't know how), both, or something else?
And more importantly, isn't there something to be said for embracing the aspects of indoor climbing that are unique to it? 'Jug ladders' are generally seen as the nadir of indoor climbing, and a mark of poor setting, and yet their outdoor equivalents - pitch 2 of Oxine/Lavaredo in North Wales, Rock Idol, Riders on the Storm - are vaunted classics precisely because of the fact that, for their grade, they are steep and/or have huge holds; i.e. they're rather like indoor jug ladders*. More specifically, indoor climbing offers two entirely unique elements; (relative) safety as compared to other disciplines (although for f*ck's sake please don't debate this - my point is that it's much less intimidating, and I think that almost everyone feels able to try harder indoors due to the at-least perceived sense of greater safety) and a wide variety of hold types and thus scope for customisation. As these are the things which make indoor climbing so popular, why do we not value the creation of routes that can only exist indoors (i.e. those which could not occur naturally or would be unsafe/impossible to protect) more highly?
Discuss.
*That admittedly ignores the element of 'exposure'; perhaps we enjoy the holds being so big purely because they allow us to be in that position - on a wall of such steepness or severity, amongst such impressive rock architecture - and feel secure, as we can wrap our quivering hands/arms around enormous jugs. However, I do think that there's a certain primal enjoyment in swinging around on jugs, and so the question then is why is this wonderful on rock and deplorable indoors? Again, the answer may again relate to the ease with which a jug ladder can be constructed indoors and, as a sort of corollary, the scarcity of steep and juggy routes outdoors, at least in the low grades, but I feel like there's more to it.
To my mind it's generally quite good, in that whenever I see a route/problem that simulates tufa climbing, jamming, etc. I give it a go (and generally quite enjoy it), but these are outliers - is that due to cost (huge tufa-style holds are expensive), tastes (most indoor climbers don't enjoy jamming, or often don't know how), both, or something else?
And more importantly, isn't there something to be said for embracing the aspects of indoor climbing that are unique to it? 'Jug ladders' are generally seen as the nadir of indoor climbing, and a mark of poor setting, and yet their outdoor equivalents - pitch 2 of Oxine/Lavaredo in North Wales, Rock Idol, Riders on the Storm - are vaunted classics precisely because of the fact that, for their grade, they are steep and/or have huge holds; i.e. they're rather like indoor jug ladders*. More specifically, indoor climbing offers two entirely unique elements; (relative) safety as compared to other disciplines (although for f*ck's sake please don't debate this - my point is that it's much less intimidating, and I think that almost everyone feels able to try harder indoors due to the at-least perceived sense of greater safety) and a wide variety of hold types and thus scope for customisation. As these are the things which make indoor climbing so popular, why do we not value the creation of routes that can only exist indoors (i.e. those which could not occur naturally or would be unsafe/impossible to protect) more highly?
Discuss.
*That admittedly ignores the element of 'exposure'; perhaps we enjoy the holds being so big purely because they allow us to be in that position - on a wall of such steepness or severity, amongst such impressive rock architecture - and feel secure, as we can wrap our quivering hands/arms around enormous jugs. However, I do think that there's a certain primal enjoyment in swinging around on jugs, and so the question then is why is this wonderful on rock and deplorable indoors? Again, the answer may again relate to the ease with which a jug ladder can be constructed indoors and, as a sort of corollary, the scarcity of steep and juggy routes outdoors, at least in the low grades, but I feel like there's more to it.
5
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
Not setting routes from a ladder leaning against the wall, so you have no idea of the actually moves involve. Seen more than once.
but when outdoors you often can't see the next jug until you reach up and find it, then yes it's another winner. Indoors you'd spot them from the ground and climb your jug ladder. These kind of outdoor routes are often popular because the jugs take people through some steep or blank ground that they'd normally have to be climbing several grades higher to experience.
Not setting routes from a ladder leaning against the wall, so you have no idea of the actually moves involve. Seen more than once.
> 'Jug ladders' are generally seen as the nadir of indoor climbing, and a mark of poor setting, and yet their outdoor equivalents - pitch 2 of Oxine/Lavaredo in North Wales, Rock Idol, Riders on the Storm - are vaunted classics precisely because of the fact that, for their grade, they are steep and/or have huge holds;
but when outdoors you often can't see the next jug until you reach up and find it, then yes it's another winner. Indoors you'd spot them from the ground and climb your jug ladder. These kind of outdoor routes are often popular because the jugs take people through some steep or blank ground that they'd normally have to be climbing several grades higher to experience.
Post edited at 11:00
In reply to summo:
Jugs can be great as long as the route is set so that you have to work on balance, dynamic movement etc in order to use them.
> Not setting routes from a ladder leaning against the wall, so you have no idea of the actually moves involve. Seen more than once.
> but when outdoors you often can't see the next jug until you reach up and find it, then yes it's another winner. Indoors you'd spot them from the ground and climb your jug ladder. These kind of outdoor routes are often popular because the jugs take people through some steep or blank ground that they'd normally have to be climbing several grades higher to experience.
Jugs can be great as long as the route is set so that you have to work on balance, dynamic movement etc in order to use them.
1
In reply to timjones:
Would agree, good for warm ups or those nursing injured fingers too.
> Jugs can be great as long as the route is set so that you have to work on balance, dynamic movement etc in order to use them.
Would agree, good for warm ups or those nursing injured fingers too.
In reply to summo:
That'll be me all of the time these days
Too many finger injuries over the years add up to arthritis. I wish that more setters had the ability to set good challenging routes without resorting to tiny holds.
> .....or those nursing injured fingers too.
That'll be me all of the time these days
Too many finger injuries over the years add up to arthritis. I wish that more setters had the ability to set good challenging routes without resorting to tiny holds.
4
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
I think you’ve hit it on the head with exposure. I imagine the same climbing moves indoors, robbed of the height above the ground, the doubt about the next holds being there, the thought that as you climb ever higher the ground gets nearer and nearer - and what’s left isn’t much. I’ve done hundreds of moves indoors, which on technical merit alone - would compete with the best outdoor cruxes I’ve done - but lack everything else, and almost all I’ve forgotten. Yet I can recall in detail dozens of crux moves from outside climbs.
Indoors I often enjoy stuff that is simply too hard for me to have a good chance at outdoors. I enjoy corners, aretes and stalactites (white spider anyone?). I also enjoy jamming cracks because then I look like a much better climber than in actuality
I think you’ve hit it on the head with exposure. I imagine the same climbing moves indoors, robbed of the height above the ground, the doubt about the next holds being there, the thought that as you climb ever higher the ground gets nearer and nearer - and what’s left isn’t much. I’ve done hundreds of moves indoors, which on technical merit alone - would compete with the best outdoor cruxes I’ve done - but lack everything else, and almost all I’ve forgotten. Yet I can recall in detail dozens of crux moves from outside climbs.
Indoors I often enjoy stuff that is simply too hard for me to have a good chance at outdoors. I enjoy corners, aretes and stalactites (white spider anyone?). I also enjoy jamming cracks because then I look like a much better climber than in actuality
1
In reply to SenzuBean:
wider spaced clips indoors? Or a seven extender route, you only take 4 and have to decide when you use them? The floor walkers might get a little excited though.
> I think you’ve hit it on the head with exposure. I imagine the same climbing moves indoors, robbed of the height above the ground, the doubt about the next holds being there, the thought that as you climb ever higher the ground gets nearer and nearer - and what’s left isn’t much. I’ve done hundreds of moves indoors, which on technical merit alone - would compete with the best outdoor cruxes I’ve done - but lack everything else, and almost all I’ve forgotten. Yet I can recall in detail dozens of crux moves from outside climbs.
wider spaced clips indoors? Or a seven extender route, you only take 4 and have to decide when you use them? The floor walkers might get a little excited though.
2
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
Yes and no. It doesn't have to "exactly like outside" but the more it gives translatable skills the better. For example, routes outside rarely involve moving left hand, then right hand, then left, then right, so problems that involve matching, going again etc help, as does not having holds evenly spaced. Similarly for feet, smears and small non postive holds are a lot more applicable than standing on a big jug.
Generally, as long as it flows well, has "nice" moves and challenges me sufficiently I'm happy.
> Inspired by an opinion expressed in another thread, and posted here so as not to derail that one: Is setting that emulates rock necessarily the ideal?
Yes and no. It doesn't have to "exactly like outside" but the more it gives translatable skills the better. For example, routes outside rarely involve moving left hand, then right hand, then left, then right, so problems that involve matching, going again etc help, as does not having holds evenly spaced. Similarly for feet, smears and small non postive holds are a lot more applicable than standing on a big jug.
Generally, as long as it flows well, has "nice" moves and challenges me sufficiently I'm happy.
1
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
I look for novelty and at least one nice move.
It's easier to explain with indoor bouldering, but the idea works for less and even top ropes I think.
Novelty. I want a climb that makes me think. I want something to involve more than just strength. The route may meander across the wall or may have an element of moving back down before reaching the top. Volumes or features may either help or hinder, or both.
If the route can teach me something eg balance or technique, then I learn something, which feels good. At the top of my admittedly low grade, I like to think of it as a friendly, quiet, almost personal competition between me and the setter. Sometimes I win, sometimes they win. They make me move my body in a certain way, or I find a shortcut, or I fail. A route without the headology is boring.
One nice move. This may be the test piece from the lesson. It may be something that just feels good. Personally I like moves requiring a change of balance from one good position to another via a heart in the mouth swing or unstable position. I like the big moves where I expect to come off, but it just works. I like the cheeky heel hook which turns a struggle into a saunter. The blind reach to a thank God hold. I like to look up at it and say "that was fun" or "next time..." Or "how the hell !!".
Maybe indoors I like the failure more than the success. Once I've cracked the puzzle, the novelty is mostly gone, so the good move must be really good to get me to repeat it.
Being short and fat, huge reaches just annoy me. If learning technique will bring the hold easily within reach, then I'm more than happy.
As a punter, or am I a bimbly nowadays, I accept that what I look for may be different to what others would like.
I look for novelty and at least one nice move.
It's easier to explain with indoor bouldering, but the idea works for less and even top ropes I think.
Novelty. I want a climb that makes me think. I want something to involve more than just strength. The route may meander across the wall or may have an element of moving back down before reaching the top. Volumes or features may either help or hinder, or both.
If the route can teach me something eg balance or technique, then I learn something, which feels good. At the top of my admittedly low grade, I like to think of it as a friendly, quiet, almost personal competition between me and the setter. Sometimes I win, sometimes they win. They make me move my body in a certain way, or I find a shortcut, or I fail. A route without the headology is boring.
One nice move. This may be the test piece from the lesson. It may be something that just feels good. Personally I like moves requiring a change of balance from one good position to another via a heart in the mouth swing or unstable position. I like the big moves where I expect to come off, but it just works. I like the cheeky heel hook which turns a struggle into a saunter. The blind reach to a thank God hold. I like to look up at it and say "that was fun" or "next time..." Or "how the hell !!".
Maybe indoors I like the failure more than the success. Once I've cracked the puzzle, the novelty is mostly gone, so the good move must be really good to get me to repeat it.
Being short and fat, huge reaches just annoy me. If learning technique will bring the hold easily within reach, then I'm more than happy.
As a punter, or am I a bimbly nowadays, I accept that what I look for may be different to what others would like.
9
In reply to markAut:
Totally agree with you about novelty, or routes that require a bit of thinking and head scratching to work out what the hell you are supposed to do. I love it when you get setters brave enough to just use volumes on a route. I like corners and bridging routes where you have to twist your body into contorted positions.
I also LOVE slabs and I am always disappointed that these seem to be neglected or forgotten about entirely in most indoor climbing walls in favour of steep pump stuff.
I guess all of the above is the kind of thing your are more likely to get outdoors.
Totally agree with you about novelty, or routes that require a bit of thinking and head scratching to work out what the hell you are supposed to do. I love it when you get setters brave enough to just use volumes on a route. I like corners and bridging routes where you have to twist your body into contorted positions.
I also LOVE slabs and I am always disappointed that these seem to be neglected or forgotten about entirely in most indoor climbing walls in favour of steep pump stuff.
I guess all of the above is the kind of thing your are more likely to get outdoors.
4
In reply to SuperLee1985:
I like odd problems now and then but when it's a significant number of the walls problems it's a real turn off.
> 'novelty'... or routes that require a bit of thinking...
I think the word novelty is dangerous, implies one off that you wouldn't get elsewhere. Thinking is a bit more like it... more though less 'competition' novelty that you never do outside.> I also LOVE slabs...
Problem with slabs is they are limited by what you can screw on a board. Most holds are quite big for slabs and you end up just making it preachy to be hard. Plus they inevitably become skin/boot/condition dependent... not why I go indoors.> I guess all of the above is the kind of thing your are more likely to get outdoors.
Much of what myself and similar friends like are thought provoking problems that can be used for training. Hard enough to push yourself but not weird enough it's about luck/conditions/boots/skin...I like odd problems now and then but when it's a significant number of the walls problems it's a real turn off.
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
The hardest thing, it seems, for indoor walls to do are: grooves, slabs, cracks and chimneys. Steep grass and friable rock, too - seriously lacking in our indoor establishments. In short, they basically don't do any of the features common to lower grade trad climbing in the UK.
They also don't do top-outs, which are up there amongst the most notoriously terrifying aspects of outdoor bouldering (which is exacerbated by the fact that the grades inside and out tend to bear no resemblance). I do notice that feet are never altogether lacking indoors in that way they are so often are outside. And the lack of texture - i.e. something to smear on - at many plywood climbing walls doesn't help prepare one for grit grovelling.
But, my 3 top suggestions for indoor improvement would be:
3. Don't let Steve the climbing instructor control the music, as he only likes drum and bass.
2. Please don't hold childrens' classes at peak times, as one day I will accidentally squash one - shouldn't they be in bed?
1. Maybe just go ahead and put a roof over Stanage Popular - it's the way things are heading, anyhow...
CW
The hardest thing, it seems, for indoor walls to do are: grooves, slabs, cracks and chimneys. Steep grass and friable rock, too - seriously lacking in our indoor establishments. In short, they basically don't do any of the features common to lower grade trad climbing in the UK.
They also don't do top-outs, which are up there amongst the most notoriously terrifying aspects of outdoor bouldering (which is exacerbated by the fact that the grades inside and out tend to bear no resemblance). I do notice that feet are never altogether lacking indoors in that way they are so often are outside. And the lack of texture - i.e. something to smear on - at many plywood climbing walls doesn't help prepare one for grit grovelling.
But, my 3 top suggestions for indoor improvement would be:
3. Don't let Steve the climbing instructor control the music, as he only likes drum and bass.
2. Please don't hold childrens' classes at peak times, as one day I will accidentally squash one - shouldn't they be in bed?
1. Maybe just go ahead and put a roof over Stanage Popular - it's the way things are heading, anyhow...
CW
3
1
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
Don't pretend you didn't know exactly what you were typing here...
> wrap our quivering hands/arms around enormous jugs.
Don't pretend you didn't know exactly what you were typing here...
3
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
Swinging about on jugs on a massive steep cliff is the best kind of climbing, and I like these routes indoors too as they're good for stamina training. Lapping super-steep jugfests is most of what I do indoors as I find it helps a lot with hanging around not getting pumped on trad.
Fingery routes at a gentler angle (still overhanging though) are best when they're a bit interesting, but overly technical is just annoying. I don't find that having desperate crux moves on holds that you can't see which way to use is remotely useful from a training perspective: it just means you get stuck, which is annoying.
I hate "technical" corners indoors, with squirming, contortions and lots of hand-foot matches. This is nothing like climbing corners or grooves outdoors, it's completely unique to indoor climbing. Same with slabs, totally unpleasant and useless, nothing like the real thing. I can see these being fun if you're indoor climbing for its own sake rather than as training.
I think that if indoor routes did actually emulate real rock, we'd probably say that the routes were boring and disjointed, with all the footholds in the wrong places. Indoor routes should be sustained, with flowing moves that require a lot of different techniques and aren't reachy (alternative footholds normally do the trick). Crap indoor routes are awkward, cruxy and have really annoying clips.
Swinging about on jugs on a massive steep cliff is the best kind of climbing, and I like these routes indoors too as they're good for stamina training. Lapping super-steep jugfests is most of what I do indoors as I find it helps a lot with hanging around not getting pumped on trad.
Fingery routes at a gentler angle (still overhanging though) are best when they're a bit interesting, but overly technical is just annoying. I don't find that having desperate crux moves on holds that you can't see which way to use is remotely useful from a training perspective: it just means you get stuck, which is annoying.
I hate "technical" corners indoors, with squirming, contortions and lots of hand-foot matches. This is nothing like climbing corners or grooves outdoors, it's completely unique to indoor climbing. Same with slabs, totally unpleasant and useless, nothing like the real thing. I can see these being fun if you're indoor climbing for its own sake rather than as training.
I think that if indoor routes did actually emulate real rock, we'd probably say that the routes were boring and disjointed, with all the footholds in the wrong places. Indoor routes should be sustained, with flowing moves that require a lot of different techniques and aren't reachy (alternative footholds normally do the trick). Crap indoor routes are awkward, cruxy and have really annoying clips.
7
1
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
All the faces on my local wall in Stirling have features, some more than others and a couple of climbs are graded for features only.
However the setters have got very good at designing routes that depend on some of these features (feet only of course) to be climbable at the stated grade. It certainly encourages reading the 'rock' and good footwork.
Also there are several climbs with lots of texture where you can use set handholds but ignore the placed footholds and only use the features for feet as a training exercise.
It is quite a small wall but with a bit of imagination and frequent route setting I never get bored.
All the faces on my local wall in Stirling have features, some more than others and a couple of climbs are graded for features only.
However the setters have got very good at designing routes that depend on some of these features (feet only of course) to be climbable at the stated grade. It certainly encourages reading the 'rock' and good footwork.
Also there are several climbs with lots of texture where you can use set handholds but ignore the placed footholds and only use the features for feet as a training exercise.
It is quite a small wall but with a bit of imagination and frequent route setting I never get bored.
1
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
Tufas. Who doesn't love a good tufa-fest.
+ 1 for the white spider stalactites.
Indoor slabs I hate.. just waiting to snap that ankle on the big hold below.
P.s chimera climbing has top outs. It's not quite font but Andre and the other guys were onto a winner designing that!
Tufas. Who doesn't love a good tufa-fest.
+ 1 for the white spider stalactites.
Indoor slabs I hate.. just waiting to snap that ankle on the big hold below.
P.s chimera climbing has top outs. It's not quite font but Andre and the other guys were onto a winner designing that!
In reply to Jon Stewart:
+1 to this.
I would uniquely use indoor climbing as training do anything which is unnecessarily technical or cruxy removes the training element if you can't get past it. Routes which get you pumped without injuring you (I.e. Small crimpy holds when feet are poor are a no go) are really what you're looking for.
If you intend on setting for people who climb indoors for the sake of climbing indoors then the setting would be different.
+1 to this.
I would uniquely use indoor climbing as training do anything which is unnecessarily technical or cruxy removes the training element if you can't get past it. Routes which get you pumped without injuring you (I.e. Small crimpy holds when feet are poor are a no go) are really what you're looking for.
If you intend on setting for people who climb indoors for the sake of climbing indoors then the setting would be different.
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
My local wall (Climbing Hangar in Liverpool) has some really good setting. Plenty of interesting features, aretes, tufa's. Even had a crack to climb at one point. Suppose it keeps it varied - there's a couple of area's I don't particularly like the setting in, but that's just personal preference and I've got friends that enjoy it. I don't think the indoor climbing can ever replicate outdoors properly though - it's just for training at the end of the day isnt it?
Agree on topping out though - only wall I know of local to me is Be Boulder in Runcorn - they have a boulder to top out on.
Tom
My local wall (Climbing Hangar in Liverpool) has some really good setting. Plenty of interesting features, aretes, tufa's. Even had a crack to climb at one point. Suppose it keeps it varied - there's a couple of area's I don't particularly like the setting in, but that's just personal preference and I've got friends that enjoy it. I don't think the indoor climbing can ever replicate outdoors properly though - it's just for training at the end of the day isnt it?
Agree on topping out though - only wall I know of local to me is Be Boulder in Runcorn - they have a boulder to top out on.
Tom
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
It's a good question. The cutting edge of route setting is in competitions. The style of setting here is constantly evolving and has been criticized for being too different to real rock. But I think most people embrace the new styles and adapt to them. Problems with multi point dynos or parkour style running starts are now common examples of new style setting though as far as I know nothing like that exists on real rock. However they're entertaining to watch, challenging for the climbers, and good at separating the field.
I think so. Indoor climbing has its own peculiarities just like gritstone or limestone does. For a start all the holds stick out. They're also very easy to see compared to outdoor routes usually making reading the routes that much easier. To make up for that the routes are often more sustained and/or more powerful than an outdoor route of the same grade. To complain that it's not like real rock is true but pointless in my opinion. It's like complaining that gritstone is not like limestone (or vice versa).
I think the word 'ladder' suggests boring, repetitive and uncreative moves. However jugs are something different. At certain angles you have to use jugs to bring a route to within a certain grade range. On steep walls (say 45 degrees) you're unlikely to find small crimps even on the hardest routes. So I don't think jugs are considered deplorable on steep walls if the route is set creatively, ie. not like a ladder. Such steep routes are what are often termed 'modern' climbing. On vertical walls or slabs though if a route is made up entirely of jugs it's likely to be pretty dull to climb.
> Is setting that emulates rock necessarily the ideal?
It's a good question. The cutting edge of route setting is in competitions. The style of setting here is constantly evolving and has been criticized for being too different to real rock. But I think most people embrace the new styles and adapt to them. Problems with multi point dynos or parkour style running starts are now common examples of new style setting though as far as I know nothing like that exists on real rock. However they're entertaining to watch, challenging for the climbers, and good at separating the field.
> And more importantly, isn't there something to be said for embracing the aspects of indoor climbing that are unique to it?
I think so. Indoor climbing has its own peculiarities just like gritstone or limestone does. For a start all the holds stick out. They're also very easy to see compared to outdoor routes usually making reading the routes that much easier. To make up for that the routes are often more sustained and/or more powerful than an outdoor route of the same grade. To complain that it's not like real rock is true but pointless in my opinion. It's like complaining that gritstone is not like limestone (or vice versa).
> 'Jug ladders' are generally seen as the nadir of indoor climbing, and a mark of poor setting,
I think the word 'ladder' suggests boring, repetitive and uncreative moves. However jugs are something different. At certain angles you have to use jugs to bring a route to within a certain grade range. On steep walls (say 45 degrees) you're unlikely to find small crimps even on the hardest routes. So I don't think jugs are considered deplorable on steep walls if the route is set creatively, ie. not like a ladder. Such steep routes are what are often termed 'modern' climbing. On vertical walls or slabs though if a route is made up entirely of jugs it's likely to be pretty dull to climb.
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
I'm going to go with "The element of surprise". Something that takes you somewhere you didn't expect to be able to go, something with a surprising or creative solution, something where each move is its own problem to be solved rather than simply holds to be pulled.
I'm going to go with "The element of surprise". Something that takes you somewhere you didn't expect to be able to go, something with a surprising or creative solution, something where each move is its own problem to be solved rather than simply holds to be pulled.
2
In reply to SuperLee1985:
Me too. And at my gym the setters have gotten rather good at making dihedrals much more interesting than (most) outdoor corners.
So if you fall on an indoor slab, you're more likely to get injured.
I LOVE cracks and constrictions, and I like outdoor routes that offer them.
Two problems for indoor routes: (a) Difficult to design cracks that can be easily and frequently _changed_ (so they don't get boring).
(b) What's easy or hard for different climbers is strongly dependent on hand size.
(b) is even more problematic for competition.
Which I guess is why pinches are more popular indoors than cracks. Though pinches occur infrequently outdoors at places I usually climb.
Ken
> I like corners and bridging routes
Me too. And at my gym the setters have gotten rather good at making dihedrals much more interesting than (most) outdoor corners.
> I also LOVE slabs
I think the reason indoor gyms don't offer then much is that indoor holds (if designed to be changed to create new routes) protrude from the wall. While outdoor holds tend to be incut.So if you fall on an indoor slab, you're more likely to get injured.
I LOVE cracks and constrictions, and I like outdoor routes that offer them.
Two problems for indoor routes: (a) Difficult to design cracks that can be easily and frequently _changed_ (so they don't get boring).
(b) What's easy or hard for different climbers is strongly dependent on hand size.
(b) is even more problematic for competition.
Which I guess is why pinches are more popular indoors than cracks. Though pinches occur infrequently outdoors at places I usually climb.
Ken
In reply to kenr:
A friend of mine once set a crack in a lead climbing comp. It completely upset the results because many of the competitors didn't know how to jam.
Pinches also have the problem with hand size though. Small hands might be able to to make the pinch. Though they're much easier to just bolt on.
A friend of mine once set a crack in a lead climbing comp. It completely upset the results because many of the competitors didn't know how to jam.
Pinches also have the problem with hand size though. Small hands might be able to to make the pinch. Though they're much easier to just bolt on.
In reply to stp:
The hand-size problem with pinch grips can be mitigated by
(a) using a hold that is thicker closer in toward the wall and thinner farther out. So people with smaller hands grip the thinner part (which is easier for then to reach).
(b) Or have a longer pinch hold which is thinner toward one end, and mount it so that the thinner end is more downward and/or more inward toward the center of the climb.
Problem with approach (a) for crack is that it forms a flaring crack, which competition climbers truly do not know (and are not practiced in) how to use. And which non-comp indoor climbers simply dislike.
(b) for crack gives a crack which varies along its length, which opens a whole other can of worms for which climbers size is advantaged.
The hand-size problem with pinch grips can be mitigated by
(a) using a hold that is thicker closer in toward the wall and thinner farther out. So people with smaller hands grip the thinner part (which is easier for then to reach).
(b) Or have a longer pinch hold which is thinner toward one end, and mount it so that the thinner end is more downward and/or more inward toward the center of the climb.
Problem with approach (a) for crack is that it forms a flaring crack, which competition climbers truly do not know (and are not practiced in) how to use. And which non-comp indoor climbers simply dislike.
(b) for crack gives a crack which varies along its length, which opens a whole other can of worms for which climbers size is advantaged.
The Barn near(ish) Tavistock also has a top-out boulder.
At least for easier routes, having moves that are a variety of lengths seems to be important - a move shouldn't have to be long to be hard. There are routes at my local wall where every (static) move on easy routes is the same length... fine if you are just tall enough (at 5' 8" I seem to be OK) but horrendous if you are shorter (as you basically can't reach any of the holds). If there are intermediate holds or the setting is just more interesting then this isn't such a problem, and obviously for dynamic moves you just have to go a bit further!
At least for easier routes, having moves that are a variety of lengths seems to be important - a move shouldn't have to be long to be hard. There are routes at my local wall where every (static) move on easy routes is the same length... fine if you are just tall enough (at 5' 8" I seem to be OK) but horrendous if you are shorter (as you basically can't reach any of the holds). If there are intermediate holds or the setting is just more interesting then this isn't such a problem, and obviously for dynamic moves you just have to go a bit further!
In reply to Valkyrie1968:
An international comp route setter once told me that the first couple of moves should be relatively easy as nothing pisses people off more than not being able to get off the ground and as far as boulder problems go the crux should never be the last move so people aren't falling from the top of the wall.
An international comp route setter once told me that the first couple of moves should be relatively easy as nothing pisses people off more than not being able to get off the ground and as far as boulder problems go the crux should never be the last move so people aren't falling from the top of the wall.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...