This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Nalle has climbed the Lapnor project. Suggesting 9A
6
In reply to puppythedog:
Good for him! Nicely written wee piece, the blank face of the overhanging boulder looks impossible. Wow!
Good for him! Nicely written wee piece, the blank face of the overhanging boulder looks impossible. Wow!
2
1
4
1
In reply to andy farnell:
I'm curious, could you please explain?
> its a bit more than that...
> Andy F
I'm curious, could you please explain?
In reply to puppythedog:
Amazing news. It's not often that new grades get introduced these days so this is major news and great historical significance.
Amazing news. It's not often that new grades get introduced these days so this is major news and great historical significance.
In reply to FreshSlate: Font 7b+/c can be British 7a, so Font 8a could be British 7b, Font 8b+ could be British 7c, so Font 9a could be British 8a. Or harder. But as no one uses British tech grades above 6c/7a all the above grades are hypothetical.
Andy F
Andy F
8
1
In reply to CharlesE:
Hubble is said to be about UK 7b and is font 8b/+. So this is four font grades harder, and it's a very short problem. Then again UK tech grades can be huge but since we don't really use them at the higher end it's somewhat pointless speculating. It's not like there's a direct correlation like french grades to E grades which is generally about 2 french grades for each E grade.
Hubble is said to be about UK 7b and is font 8b/+. So this is four font grades harder, and it's a very short problem. Then again UK tech grades can be huge but since we don't really use them at the higher end it's somewhat pointless speculating. It's not like there's a direct correlation like french grades to E grades which is generally about 2 french grades for each E grade.
2
In reply to CharlesE:
Who cares! It's hopefully the first 9a boulder.
> Could this even be British tech 7c?
Who cares! It's hopefully the first 9a boulder.
In reply to andy farnell:
Thanks Andy,
If we're happy building on E grades i.e. E9/10/11 etc. why doesn't anyone say, 'that's the hardest move I've ever done - I'll give the route 7c british tech'?
Thanks Andy,
If we're happy building on E grades i.e. E9/10/11 etc. why doesn't anyone say, 'that's the hardest move I've ever done - I'll give the route 7c british tech'?
In reply to FreshSlate:
You are assuming that the rest of the world cares about an irrelevant grading system, you might as well ask why no one cares what the smell of yellow is.
Remember E is for EXTREME
You are assuming that the rest of the world cares about an irrelevant grading system, you might as well ask why no one cares what the smell of yellow is.
Remember E is for EXTREME
Post edited at 20:19
4
2
In reply to alx:
Does it matter if the rest of the world cares? I'm sure the Australian system will continue to add numbers on to their system despite relatively few using it. I'm just not sure why we stopped bothering to further gradate the difficulty of a single move.
> You are assuming that the rest of the world cares about an irrelevant grading system, you might as well ask why no one cares what the smell of yellow is.
> Remember E is for EXTREME
Does it matter if the rest of the world cares? I'm sure the Australian system will continue to add numbers on to their system despite relatively few using it. I'm just not sure why we stopped bothering to further gradate the difficulty of a single move.
In reply to FreshSlate:
As above. Everyone understands the Font and V systems, they both explain the difficulties more accurately than the British tech grade, so it makes sense above British 6c to use those instead, imho.
Andy F
> If we're happy building on E grades i.e. E9/10/11 etc. why doesn't anyone say, 'that's the hardest move I've ever done - I'll give the route 7c british tech'?
As above. Everyone understands the Font and V systems, they both explain the difficulties more accurately than the British tech grade, so it makes sense above British 6c to use those instead, imho.
Andy F
1
1
In reply to andy farnell:
I think you've tried your best but I don't think I will ever understand how the British tech grade transitioned into a closed system finishing at 7b, regardless of the prevalence of other grades that may be used alongside (e.g. how sport grades are often used along side hard trad grades). Lots of other niche grading systems continue.
> As above. Everyone understands the Font and V systems, they both explain the difficulties more accurately than the British tech grade, so it makes sense above British 6c to use those instead, imho.
> Andy F
I think you've tried your best but I don't think I will ever understand how the British tech grade transitioned into a closed system finishing at 7b, regardless of the prevalence of other grades that may be used alongside (e.g. how sport grades are often used along side hard trad grades). Lots of other niche grading systems continue.
In reply to FreshSlate:
People didn't want their 6as getting downgraded so 6a got wider and wider. People really didn't want their 6bs getting downgraded so 6b got wider still. No one wanted their 6cs to get downgraded and they weren't confident enough to go for 7a so 6c got ridiculous. 7a ended up wider than yo momma and 7b is so wide that no one can see the other side.
> I think you've tried your best but I don't think I will ever understand how the British tech grade transitioned into a closed system finishing at 7b,
People didn't want their 6as getting downgraded so 6a got wider and wider. People really didn't want their 6bs getting downgraded so 6b got wider still. No one wanted their 6cs to get downgraded and they weren't confident enough to go for 7a so 6c got ridiculous. 7a ended up wider than yo momma and 7b is so wide that no one can see the other side.
21
In reply to Lemony:
Thanks Lemony,
I certainly agree that it's part of it, other grading systems seem to work themselves out with routes getting regraded over time, weird how the British tech grade has ended up this way
Thanks Lemony,
I certainly agree that it's part of it, other grading systems seem to work themselves out with routes getting regraded over time, weird how the British tech grade has ended up this way
Post edited at 22:25
In reply to FreshSlate:
Not really. It's the nature of grading for individual moves. A single move is far more subject to body shape and individual strengths than a sequence which will quickly tend towards a mean grade as it gets longer. Because of that it's far more likely that a climber operating at the same level as you will find an individual move substantially easier than you do than a sequence.
Not really. It's the nature of grading for individual moves. A single move is far more subject to body shape and individual strengths than a sequence which will quickly tend towards a mean grade as it gets longer. Because of that it's far more likely that a climber operating at the same level as you will find an individual move substantially easier than you do than a sequence.
1
In reply to FreshSlate:
Regardless of the "how"; that is just the way it is. Go to a sport crag like Malham or Kilnsey - nobody ever describes the cruxes of sport routes in term of UK tech grades - that system has become redundant above around UK6c. Above that level, most climbers appear to find comparissons with font or V grades far easier. Maybe because it is very hard to realise the difficulty of a single move (as required by the UK tech system) - just too brief and too morpho. A grade that describes a "package" of moves is more easily assessed and more in keeping with the rigours of the climbs (multiple moves to get from shake-out to shake-out). Also, most climbers likely spend the time they are not sport-climbing, bouldering rather than tradding is likely a factor.
> I think you've tried your best but I don't think I will ever understand how the British tech grade transitioned into a closed system finishing at 7b, regardless of the prevalence of other grades that may be used alongside (e.g. how sport grades are often used along side hard trad grades). Lots of other niche grading systems continue.
Regardless of the "how"; that is just the way it is. Go to a sport crag like Malham or Kilnsey - nobody ever describes the cruxes of sport routes in term of UK tech grades - that system has become redundant above around UK6c. Above that level, most climbers appear to find comparissons with font or V grades far easier. Maybe because it is very hard to realise the difficulty of a single move (as required by the UK tech system) - just too brief and too morpho. A grade that describes a "package" of moves is more easily assessed and more in keeping with the rigours of the climbs (multiple moves to get from shake-out to shake-out). Also, most climbers likely spend the time they are not sport-climbing, bouldering rather than tradding is likely a factor.
3
In reply to Lemony:
A reasonable explanation, although the grades can be alot narrower than the top end whilst functioning relatively well. Surely there is room for a few more steps between 6a and 7b lets say. If 7b is the hardest possible move until now does the crux of this problem deserve a 7c?
> Not really. It's the nature of grading for individual moves. A single move is far more subject to body shape and individual strengths than a sequence which will quickly tend towards a mean grade as it gets longer. Because of that it's far more likely that a climber operating at the same level as you will find an individual move substantially easier than you do than a sequence.
A reasonable explanation, although the grades can be alot narrower than the top end whilst functioning relatively well. Surely there is room for a few more steps between 6a and 7b lets say. If 7b is the hardest possible move until now does the crux of this problem deserve a 7c?
In reply to thebigfriendlymoose:
To be fair, I've never heard a person talking in tech grades when discussing a sport route.
Interesting, I agree with the prevalence of other grades and UK tech falling out of favour. I believe a boulderer whi has fallen off/stuck a particular move hundreds of times very well placed to assess the dificulty of a single move, although I don't imagine they would ever bother trying to assign a UK tech grade to it as the system is broken.
> Regardless of the "how"; that is just the way it is. Go to a sport crag like Malham or Kilnsey - nobody ever describes the cruxes of sport routes in term of UK tech grades - that system has become redundant above around UK6c.
To be fair, I've never heard a person talking in tech grades when discussing a sport route.
> Above that level, most climbers appear to find comparissons with font or V grades far easier. Maybe because it is very hard to realise the difficulty of a single move (as required by the UK tech system) - just too brief and too morpho. A grade that describes a "package" of moves is more easily assessed and more in keeping with the rigours of the climbs (multiple moves to get from shake-out to shake-out). Also, most climbers likely spend the time they are not sport-climbing, bouldering rather than tradding is likely a factor.
Interesting, I agree with the prevalence of other grades and UK tech falling out of favour. I believe a boulderer whi has fallen off/stuck a particular move hundreds of times very well placed to assess the dificulty of a single move, although I don't imagine they would ever bother trying to assign a UK tech grade to it as the system is broken.
Post edited at 22:51
In reply to FreshSlate:
I would find it tricky to break down even a short boulder problem to a UK tech grade for a single move. Does a shift of a foot from a smear to another smear count as a move?! Or do only hand moves count? Assessing a UK tech grade for the apex nastinessof any route I have done above around F7c feels impossible. Yet, I could readily provide a V / font equivalent for the businesss end of every cruxy route at Malham or Kilnsey. I find that the perceived difficultly of sport route cruxes meshes with boulder problem grades - sequences, rather than a single moves.
I would find it tricky to break down even a short boulder problem to a UK tech grade for a single move. Does a shift of a foot from a smear to another smear count as a move?! Or do only hand moves count? Assessing a UK tech grade for the apex nastinessof any route I have done above around F7c feels impossible. Yet, I could readily provide a V / font equivalent for the businesss end of every cruxy route at Malham or Kilnsey. I find that the perceived difficultly of sport route cruxes meshes with boulder problem grades - sequences, rather than a single moves.
In reply to thebigfriendlymoose:
The UK tech grade is for a single move as in one position to another, typically one movement of both hands and both feet (rather confusingly "move" seems to be increasingly used for a single hand movement, especially when counting the number of moves of a route or problem). Font and V bouldering grades are for a whole problem which might be between one and really quite a lot of moves, so in principle the UK tech grade is a more precise and better defined measure. Fair enough if V or font grades are found more useful by sport climbers familiar with them for assessing a crux sequence, but in principle a UK tech grade is perfectly applicable to a single move and it is just a shame that the system has become too compressed at the upper end. But a lot depends on what you are used to; at the grades I climb (up to UK tech 6b), the UK tech grade works perfectly well for trad and I could happily grade any single move on a sport route, but Font and V grades are virtually meaningless to me for the simple reason that I vary rarely go bouldering, let alone with a guidebook.
> I would find it tricky to break down even a short boulder problem to a UK tech grade for a single move. Does a shift of a foot from a smear to another smear count as a move?! Or do only hand moves count? Assessing a UK tech grade for the apex nastinessof any route I have done above around F7c feels impossible.
The UK tech grade is for a single move as in one position to another, typically one movement of both hands and both feet (rather confusingly "move" seems to be increasingly used for a single hand movement, especially when counting the number of moves of a route or problem). Font and V bouldering grades are for a whole problem which might be between one and really quite a lot of moves, so in principle the UK tech grade is a more precise and better defined measure. Fair enough if V or font grades are found more useful by sport climbers familiar with them for assessing a crux sequence, but in principle a UK tech grade is perfectly applicable to a single move and it is just a shame that the system has become too compressed at the upper end. But a lot depends on what you are used to; at the grades I climb (up to UK tech 6b), the UK tech grade works perfectly well for trad and I could happily grade any single move on a sport route, but Font and V grades are virtually meaningless to me for the simple reason that I vary rarely go bouldering, let alone with a guidebook.
In reply to FreshSlate:
With a slight modification, the British tech grade would work just fine.
6a and 6b are broad, but fine - the fact that people often find it hard to say whether something is 6a or 6b suggests that these grades aren't far too broad (it's always going to be approximate. British 6c works too, apart from at its upper end, where people have been reluctant to use British 7a in the past.
There's so much history in using British tech grades and people have such a familiarity with them that we won't just throw them away. What will happen, sooner or later, is that British tech 7a finds its true location, slightly easier than it is now on average, taking on the top end of British 6c and extending about halfway through the current 7a grade. 7b will then extend around the level of the upper font 7s/low font 8s and then font 7c (which people only don't use out of ego) will extend for the cutting edge.
All we need is people with logic and a little bit of bravery.
With a slight modification, the British tech grade would work just fine.
6a and 6b are broad, but fine - the fact that people often find it hard to say whether something is 6a or 6b suggests that these grades aren't far too broad (it's always going to be approximate. British 6c works too, apart from at its upper end, where people have been reluctant to use British 7a in the past.
There's so much history in using British tech grades and people have such a familiarity with them that we won't just throw them away. What will happen, sooner or later, is that British tech 7a finds its true location, slightly easier than it is now on average, taking on the top end of British 6c and extending about halfway through the current 7a grade. 7b will then extend around the level of the upper font 7s/low font 8s and then font 7c (which people only don't use out of ego) will extend for the cutting edge.
All we need is people with logic and a little bit of bravery.
8
1
In reply to Robert Durran:
I just can't see how your description of a sport route (in uk tech grading) could be useful at all.
U.K. 6b could be anything from Font6B-Font7A+. For me personally I'd have a chance of getting up Font6B in my trainers whereas Font7A+ may take me several visits. Absolutely useless.
> The UK tech grade is for a single move as in one position to another, typically one movement of both hands and both feet (rather confusingly "move" seems to be increasingly used for a single hand movement, especially when counting the number of moves of a route or problem). Font and V bouldering grades are for a whole problem which might be between one and really quite a lot of moves, so in principle the UK tech grade is a more precise and better defined measure. Fair enough if V or font grades are found more useful by sport climbers familiar with them for assessing a crux sequence, but in principle a UK tech grade is perfectly applicable to a single move and it is just a shame that the system has become too compressed at the upper end. But a lot depends on what you are used to; at the grades I climb (up to UK tech 6b), the UK tech grade works perfectly well for trad and I could happily grade any single move on a sport route, but Font and V grades are virtually meaningless to me for the simple reason that I vary rarely go bouldering, let alone with a guidebook.
I just can't see how your description of a sport route (in uk tech grading) could be useful at all.
U.K. 6b could be anything from Font6B-Font7A+. For me personally I'd have a chance of getting up Font6B in my trainers whereas Font7A+ may take me several visits. Absolutely useless.
In reply to Franco Cookson:
And until grades start to get straightened out routes will get described with a French grade (or a boulder grade if they're one move wonders).
If guidebook writers could take this onboard it would be great
And until grades start to get straightened out routes will get described with a French grade (or a boulder grade if they're one move wonders).
If guidebook writers could take this onboard it would be great
In reply to Robert Durran:
For you, perhaps. Move= hand movement as far as in concerned, with extra clarity provided if the foot moves are particularly hard or particularly different ("10 hand moves but about 40 foot movements", or "10 hand moves but there's a really hard foot swap too").
> The UK tech grade is for a single move as in one position to another, typically one movement of both hands and both feet (rather confusingly "move" seems to be increasingly used for a single hand movement, especially when counting the number of moves of a route or problem).
For you, perhaps. Move= hand movement as far as in concerned, with extra clarity provided if the foot moves are particularly hard or particularly different ("10 hand moves but about 40 foot movements", or "10 hand moves but there's a really hard foot swap too").
In reply to deacondeacon:
But this is just daft grading and people not knowing what they're grading. If you gave a trad route a font grade, which bit are you grading - a section or a hand movement? font 7a+ for a single hand move is pretty damn hard and if you put a few of them together it might feel more like font 7c.
Look at how many problems there are with people getting the British tech grade wrong with first ascents - Imagine what it'd be like with way more integers.
I did a route a while ago that I thought was around font 7b. My mate thought it probably worthy of font 7c. Dan Varian repeats and thinks it's font 6c+. We had all used font grades a fair bit and still we get an anomaly like that - What's the point of such a precise system being implemented that is so impossible to actually use precisely? In reality I also gave the route British 6c. No one would have probably argued with that - so the tech grade seems to have come out on top there.
But this is just daft grading and people not knowing what they're grading. If you gave a trad route a font grade, which bit are you grading - a section or a hand movement? font 7a+ for a single hand move is pretty damn hard and if you put a few of them together it might feel more like font 7c.
Look at how many problems there are with people getting the British tech grade wrong with first ascents - Imagine what it'd be like with way more integers.
I did a route a while ago that I thought was around font 7b. My mate thought it probably worthy of font 7c. Dan Varian repeats and thinks it's font 6c+. We had all used font grades a fair bit and still we get an anomaly like that - What's the point of such a precise system being implemented that is so impossible to actually use precisely? In reality I also gave the route British 6c. No one would have probably argued with that - so the tech grade seems to have come out on top there.
Post edited at 07:01
8
2
In reply to Franco Cookson:
I agree with you, the grades need to decompress into their rightful positions and then they'll be far more useful. But how long will that take, another 30 years? Until then other grading systems describe our routes more usefully.
As for the'is it graded for one hand movement etc' if it's a Font grade it'll be the bit that makes me grunt (or fall off).
I agree with you, the grades need to decompress into their rightful positions and then they'll be far more useful. But how long will that take, another 30 years? Until then other grading systems describe our routes more usefully.
As for the'is it graded for one hand movement etc' if it's a Font grade it'll be the bit that makes me grunt (or fall off).
In reply to Franco Cookson:
But it hasn't come out on top has it?
This just proves that U.K grades in the upper numbers are so vague that they don't actually tell us how difficult the route is.
Id have no idea wether I'd have a chance of Onsighting it, or wether I'd need to train for three years to have a chance of doing it. Then you've had a couple more people climb it and the bouldering difficulty is starting to get a consensus it's giving us more information.
I'm a punter that goes around repeating 3 star routes from the olden days that tend to develop a solid consensus on grades, so it's not too bad for me.
But for you guys climbing the bigger numbers that are less travelled it must be much more problematic.
> But this is just daft grading and people not knowing what they're grading. If you gave a trad route a font grade, which bit are you grading - a section or a hand movement? font 7a+ for a single hand move is pretty damn hard and if you put a few of them together it might feel more like font 7c.
> so the tech grade seems to have come out on top there.
But it hasn't come out on top has it?
This just proves that U.K grades in the upper numbers are so vague that they don't actually tell us how difficult the route is.
Id have no idea wether I'd have a chance of Onsighting it, or wether I'd need to train for three years to have a chance of doing it. Then you've had a couple more people climb it and the bouldering difficulty is starting to get a consensus it's giving us more information.
I'm a punter that goes around repeating 3 star routes from the olden days that tend to develop a solid consensus on grades, so it's not too bad for me.
But for you guys climbing the bigger numbers that are less travelled it must be much more problematic.
In reply to Franco Cookson: There is an enormous difference between 7C and 6C+. I know which persons grade I'd believe. But as others have said, British 6c is so wide its useless.
There are better ways of grading than our old, outdated and frankly useless tech system. The E grade is well understood and mostly used well. IMHO, the addition of the Font grade would provide more than enough information.
Andy F
There are better ways of grading than our old, outdated and frankly useless tech system. The E grade is well understood and mostly used well. IMHO, the addition of the Font grade would provide more than enough information.
Andy F
3
7
In reply to andy farnell:
which is completely forgetting that uk tech works brilliantly between 4a and 5c (6a/B? I dunno im not that good) so surely it just needs sorting out at the top end? much like the adjective grading did when HVS was the top grade in England and wales or VS in Scotland.
which is completely forgetting that uk tech works brilliantly between 4a and 5c (6a/B? I dunno im not that good) so surely it just needs sorting out at the top end? much like the adjective grading did when HVS was the top grade in England and wales or VS in Scotland.
1
In reply to joem:
'brilliantly' might be a bit of an exaggeration... :P plus it is pretty poor if it only manages to work over two number grades without +/- which is only 6 grades in total! Imagine if only one number grade in French or Font grades (six total grades) worked sensibly! (6a to 6c+, or 6b+ to 7b perhaps)
'brilliantly' might be a bit of an exaggeration... :P plus it is pretty poor if it only manages to work over two number grades without +/- which is only 6 grades in total! Imagine if only one number grade in French or Font grades (six total grades) worked sensibly! (6a to 6c+, or 6b+ to 7b perhaps)
2
In reply to AJM:
I like this description from the Self Coached Climber:
"Although climbing is not considered a high-speed sport, individual climbing moves do tend to be rapid and often take a mere fraction of a second to complete. Within that brief period of time, there is a story, an intricate narrative in the body with a beginning, middle and end. The beginning is the movement's initiation: what muscles are recruited, what joints begin to move first. The middle is what events follow as a result of the initiation - how the move develops and is controlled, and what path the body takes through space. A move ends when the objective is either attained or missed, when the forces created in the move dissipate or are redirected, transferred into the next move."
> For you, perhaps. Move= hand movement as far as in concerned, with extra clarity provided if the foot moves are particularly hard or particularly different ("10 hand moves but about 40 foot movements", or "10 hand moves but there's a really hard foot swap too").
I like this description from the Self Coached Climber:
"Although climbing is not considered a high-speed sport, individual climbing moves do tend to be rapid and often take a mere fraction of a second to complete. Within that brief period of time, there is a story, an intricate narrative in the body with a beginning, middle and end. The beginning is the movement's initiation: what muscles are recruited, what joints begin to move first. The middle is what events follow as a result of the initiation - how the move develops and is controlled, and what path the body takes through space. A move ends when the objective is either attained or missed, when the forces created in the move dissipate or are redirected, transferred into the next move."
2
In reply to joem:
it works totally fine between those grades but I can't see why a Font grade would work any less well and that works perfectly fine all the way from 1-9a
> works brilliantly between 4a and 5c
it works totally fine between those grades but I can't see why a Font grade would work any less well and that works perfectly fine all the way from 1-9a
1
In reply to Lemony:
well brilliantly may be a bit over the top but it gives a good a reasonably well understood idea of the difficulty of the hardest moves on a climb, the font grading system works well for bouldering, much better than the v grades but I think if it was applied as a technical grade to trad routes it would soon break down and reveal its own set of issues.
well brilliantly may be a bit over the top but it gives a good a reasonably well understood idea of the difficulty of the hardest moves on a climb, the font grading system works well for bouldering, much better than the v grades but I think if it was applied as a technical grade to trad routes it would soon break down and reveal its own set of issues.
In reply to Franco Cookson:
I was flicking through an old slate guide from the mid eighties. It had a grading table at the front which described:
Reasonably protected 5a - hvs
Reasonably protected 5b - e1
Reasonably protected 5c - e2
Reasonably protected 6a - e3
Reasonably protected 6b - e4
Etc
E10 8b?
Why not stick with the original intention of the grading system? It just needs the reclaiming of 6c and up tech grades (although I probably disagree with what the early slate heads classify as "reasonable protection"!)
I was flicking through an old slate guide from the mid eighties. It had a grading table at the front which described:
Reasonably protected 5a - hvs
Reasonably protected 5b - e1
Reasonably protected 5c - e2
Reasonably protected 6a - e3
Reasonably protected 6b - e4
Etc
E10 8b?
Why not stick with the original intention of the grading system? It just needs the reclaiming of 6c and up tech grades (although I probably disagree with what the early slate heads classify as "reasonable protection"!)
3
In reply to deacondeacon:
It would be a lot better than nothing - I would stand a reasonable chance of flashing a 7b (Uk tech 6a) but no chance of flashing a 7b (Uk tech 6c) because I can do Uk tech 6a moves and have good endurance, but I know that a single Uk tech 6c move will stop me in my tracks. Note that I'm definitely not arguing that it is better than a V or font grade for for the majority of sport climbers (indeed the consensus is that V or font grades are much more useful for sport routes). But for me personally a V or font grade is all but useless simply because I never go bouldering with a guidebook, so I can't relate them to my own experience, whereas I've been trad climbing for 35 years and am very comfortable with interpreting UK tech grades up to 6b.
A daft point which in itself does nothing for your case. These things work both ways; Font 6c could be anything from Uk tech x to Uk tech y (I don't know what x and y are but someone familiar with both systems will know).
The fact that E2 could be anything from 5a to 6a, and that 5c could be anything from HVS to E4 does not mean that either the UK adjectival grade or the UK tech grade is useless. Same, of course, applies to the French and Font combination for sport routes which you are arguing for!
> I just can't see how your description of a sport route (in uk tech grading) could be useful at all.
It would be a lot better than nothing - I would stand a reasonable chance of flashing a 7b (Uk tech 6a) but no chance of flashing a 7b (Uk tech 6c) because I can do Uk tech 6a moves and have good endurance, but I know that a single Uk tech 6c move will stop me in my tracks. Note that I'm definitely not arguing that it is better than a V or font grade for for the majority of sport climbers (indeed the consensus is that V or font grades are much more useful for sport routes). But for me personally a V or font grade is all but useless simply because I never go bouldering with a guidebook, so I can't relate them to my own experience, whereas I've been trad climbing for 35 years and am very comfortable with interpreting UK tech grades up to 6b.
> U.K. 6b could be anything from Font6B-Font7A...........Absolutely useless.
A daft point which in itself does nothing for your case. These things work both ways; Font 6c could be anything from Uk tech x to Uk tech y (I don't know what x and y are but someone familiar with both systems will know).
The fact that E2 could be anything from 5a to 6a, and that 5c could be anything from HVS to E4 does not mean that either the UK adjectival grade or the UK tech grade is useless. Same, of course, applies to the French and Font combination for sport routes which you are arguing for!
Post edited at 15:00
2
1
In reply to joem:
Works brilliantly at 6a as well, and from what Franco says, also 6b
> which is completely forgetting that uk tech works brilliantly between 4a and 5c (6a/B? I dunno im not that good)
Works brilliantly at 6a as well, and from what Franco says, also 6b
1
2
In reply to AJM:
The hand movement thing is relatively new (I don't know when it came in) probably sport climbing thing and there's nothing wrong with it, but a move always used to be a complete change of position (ie almost always both hands and feet and maybe more). The UK tech grade for the hardest move on a route refers to the original meaning - you would never say that a single hand movement is 6a say. Both meanings are useful (the hand movement count is, in particular, a good measure of the type of endurance needed for a problem or route), but it is a shame that there is potential confusion.
> For you, perhaps. Move= hand movement as far as I'm concerned.
The hand movement thing is relatively new (I don't know when it came in) probably sport climbing thing and there's nothing wrong with it, but a move always used to be a complete change of position (ie almost always both hands and feet and maybe more). The UK tech grade for the hardest move on a route refers to the original meaning - you would never say that a single hand movement is 6a say. Both meanings are useful (the hand movement count is, in particular, a good measure of the type of endurance needed for a problem or route), but it is a shame that there is potential confusion.
Post edited at 15:03
1
In reply to Kemics:
>
Unfortunately the above is meaningless without clarifying e.g. how sustained or strenuous the route is. One 5c move or twenty? That's the main reason trad and tech grades don't just go up neatly like that.
>
> Reasonably protected 5a - hvs
> Reasonably protected 5b - e1
> Reasonably protected 5c - e2
> Reasonably protected 6a - e3
> Reasonably protected 6b - e4
>
> Reasonably protected 5b - e1
> Reasonably protected 5c - e2
> Reasonably protected 6a - e3
> Reasonably protected 6b - e4
>
Unfortunately the above is meaningless without clarifying e.g. how sustained or strenuous the route is. One 5c move or twenty? That's the main reason trad and tech grades don't just go up neatly like that.
3
In reply to Robert Durran:
I agree with AJM re hand (and sometimes foot) movement. Of course this could just be a shunt along to a different part of a break to help the next move but in the context of describing key moves on a route, a simple hand swap on a small hold could be the crux, and one long reach to a jug would likely involve movement of the whole body anyway.
I agree with AJM re hand (and sometimes foot) movement. Of course this could just be a shunt along to a different part of a break to help the next move but in the context of describing key moves on a route, a simple hand swap on a small hold could be the crux, and one long reach to a jug would likely involve movement of the whole body anyway.
In reply to puppythedog:
The hardest problem in the world gets climbed and the thread descends in to an argument about the UK tech grade. Wow.
The hardest problem in the world gets climbed and the thread descends in to an argument about the UK tech grade. Wow.
19
In reply to Michael Gordon:
It's not a matter of disagreeing or agreeing. Just accepting that unfortunately the word "move" has acquired two different meanings. Of course, if you do not accept that there are two different meanings, then you are wrong!
> I agree with AJM re hand (and sometimes foot) movement.
It's not a matter of disagreeing or agreeing. Just accepting that unfortunately the word "move" has acquired two different meanings. Of course, if you do not accept that there are two different meanings, then you are wrong!
1
In reply to Robert Durran:
OK. I might suggest that ours has become the more used definition nowadays.
OK. I might suggest that ours has become the more used definition nowadays.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
Probably among sport climbers, probably not among trad climbers. Not sure overall.
> OK. I might suggest that ours has become the more used definition nowadays.
Probably among sport climbers, probably not among trad climbers. Not sure overall.
In reply to Robert Durran:
That's not true and you would know that if you ever used Font grades. Ft6C is a relatively small subset really of uk6b, unless you were to consider an usually long and sustained boulder traverse.
Think about it: for short sequences, between uk6a and uk6c you have everything from font 6a to about font 7b or something, which would be 9 font grades for 3 uk tech grades. They are far more refined.
I agree though thwt there would be occasional problems with interpretation of where the hardest sequence began and ended.
> A daft point which in itself does nothing for your case. These things work both ways; Font 6c could be anything from Uk tech x to Uk tech y (I don't know what x and y are but someone familiar with both systems will know).
That's not true and you would know that if you ever used Font grades. Ft6C is a relatively small subset really of uk6b, unless you were to consider an usually long and sustained boulder traverse.
Think about it: for short sequences, between uk6a and uk6c you have everything from font 6a to about font 7b or something, which would be 9 font grades for 3 uk tech grades. They are far more refined.
I agree though thwt there would be occasional problems with interpretation of where the hardest sequence began and ended.
1
In reply to Si dH:
Fair enough, I have no personal experience of Font grades, though your example of a long traverse does sort of prove that there is some sense in what I am saying.
The fact remains that the UK Tech grade and the Font grade are measuring different things (hardest move and whole problem), so there should not really be any conflict between them. If the UK Tech grade were finer grained, they could be usefully used in combination, just as UK tech grades and French grades can usefully be used in combination for routes.
> That's not true and you would know that if you ever used Font grades. Ft6C is a relatively small subset really of uk6b, unless you were to consider an usually long and sustained boulder traverse.
Fair enough, I have no personal experience of Font grades, though your example of a long traverse does sort of prove that there is some sense in what I am saying.
The fact remains that the UK Tech grade and the Font grade are measuring different things (hardest move and whole problem), so there should not really be any conflict between them. If the UK Tech grade were finer grained, they could be usefully used in combination, just as UK tech grades and French grades can usefully be used in combination for routes.
> A daft point which in itself does nothing for your case. These things work both ways; Font 6c could be anything from Uk tech x to Uk tech y (I don't know what x and y are but someone familiar with both systems will know).
It's UK 6b. If anyone says any different, that's due to UK tech grades being undefined at that particular grade, not font grades.
1
In reply to dr_botnik:
Ok, so x=y=6b
> It's UK 6b. If anyone says any different, that's due to UK tech grades being undefined at that particular grade, not font grades.
Ok, so x=y=6b
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...