This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
The other night at the wall we were climbing a route that seemed to have had "decoy" holds set. They were way out to the left compared to the rest of the route, in fact they were on the right hand edge of the next panel over. The rest of the route went up a corner on the right hand side of the panel, with some moves (as it turned out) using only holds on the other side of the corner.
The holds in question were the type of flat, round holds about about the size of a side plate. Although I could get my left foot across to them, they were in completely the wrong place to be of any use whatsoever for moving up, since everything else was well over towards the corner on the right. I suppose they might have been useful to someone with much longer legs and arms than me (I'm 6ft with 34" inside leg) but my pal who is taller and rangier than me declared them useless as well. They definitely weren't part of any route on the next panel: there was nothing on that panel of the same colour.
We came to the conclusion that they had been put there to try to make people believe, mistakenly, that moving leftwards out of the corner would be a worthwhile approach.
I think I've encountered the odd "decoy" - or at least not obviously useful - hold on indoor routes before, but never three big 'uns on one route like this.
As a result of this experience, I have two not entirely serious questions:
1) Have other people encountered such attempts at apparent misdirection by a route setter?
2) Is such a practice regarded as ethical?
The holds in question were the type of flat, round holds about about the size of a side plate. Although I could get my left foot across to them, they were in completely the wrong place to be of any use whatsoever for moving up, since everything else was well over towards the corner on the right. I suppose they might have been useful to someone with much longer legs and arms than me (I'm 6ft with 34" inside leg) but my pal who is taller and rangier than me declared them useless as well. They definitely weren't part of any route on the next panel: there was nothing on that panel of the same colour.
We came to the conclusion that they had been put there to try to make people believe, mistakenly, that moving leftwards out of the corner would be a worthwhile approach.
I think I've encountered the odd "decoy" - or at least not obviously useful - hold on indoor routes before, but never three big 'uns on one route like this.
As a result of this experience, I have two not entirely serious questions:
1) Have other people encountered such attempts at apparent misdirection by a route setter?
2) Is such a practice regarded as ethical?
3
10
In reply to Martin W:
I've been caught out like this a few times ("These cant possibly be on route!") and skip these holds entirely only to have some one show me how it was _intended_ to be done later.
Think how they could be used. Maybe it's supposed to be climbed like The Quarryman
or perhaps they make up a different problem entirely, maybe including features / volumes so it's less obvious?
I've been caught out like this a few times ("These cant possibly be on route!") and skip these holds entirely only to have some one show me how it was _intended_ to be done later.
Think how they could be used. Maybe it's supposed to be climbed like The Quarryman
or perhaps they make up a different problem entirely, maybe including features / volumes so it's less obvious?
Post edited at 13:39
2
In reply to Martin W:
I seem to recall both the crux of Vector and the crux of Kipling Groove having clever 'decoy' holds. The one on KG actually made me laugh.
I seem to recall both the crux of Vector and the crux of Kipling Groove having clever 'decoy' holds. The one on KG actually made me laugh.
6
2
In reply to Martin W:
You should see outdoor climbing... it's even worse. They don't even paint the holds the same colour.
> 2) Is such a practice regarded as ethical?
You should see outdoor climbing... it's even worse. They don't even paint the holds the same colour.
82
In reply to Angrypenguin:
Bastards! You'll be telling me they camouflage them next.......
> You should see outdoor climbing... it's even worse. They don't even paint the holds the same colour.
Bastards! You'll be telling me they camouflage them next.......
12
In reply to Martin W:
If AR1, which line and route? There have been various accidental mistakes over the last few months. Currently (or last week anyway) there are two routes with missing holds! A setter removing old routes "forgot" that some holds were either a different route entirely (same colour but different line; orange line 14) or used jointly by another next to it (red, line 11) and removed some holds.
Given the bouldering competition is on tomorrow night, don't go at the weekend or you will have more to worry about when they forget to replace holds removed for the comp! .
I've not noticed any deliberate decoys recently. There are some very hard moves some of the setters set, but if you ask them they are happy to explain or show how to do them and why they were set as they were. Of course with different strengths, weaknesses and styles, knowing how to do them does not really help!
Did you try the pink line 41? Most climbers who try it question whether a 5+ can have a dyno move on the overhang. Management are sticking to the 5+ grade!
If AR1, which line and route? There have been various accidental mistakes over the last few months. Currently (or last week anyway) there are two routes with missing holds! A setter removing old routes "forgot" that some holds were either a different route entirely (same colour but different line; orange line 14) or used jointly by another next to it (red, line 11) and removed some holds.
Given the bouldering competition is on tomorrow night, don't go at the weekend or you will have more to worry about when they forget to replace holds removed for the comp! .
I've not noticed any deliberate decoys recently. There are some very hard moves some of the setters set, but if you ask them they are happy to explain or show how to do them and why they were set as they were. Of course with different strengths, weaknesses and styles, knowing how to do them does not really help!
Did you try the pink line 41? Most climbers who try it question whether a 5+ can have a dyno move on the overhang. Management are sticking to the 5+ grade!
In reply to Martin W:
It might be worth mentioning which climbing wall and route precisely you're talking about.
Chances are somebody else have done the route and maybe incorporated the holds into the sequence and they could either give you the beta or confirm that they didn't use those holds.
To be honest, sounds like an interesting route which makes you think.
Onto your question though, I have skipped holds on a number of occasions doing sequences differently indoors, however I always thought that this was just due to body type/climbing style etc, rather a setter trying to place a decoy hold.
It might be worth mentioning which climbing wall and route precisely you're talking about.
Chances are somebody else have done the route and maybe incorporated the holds into the sequence and they could either give you the beta or confirm that they didn't use those holds.
To be honest, sounds like an interesting route which makes you think.
Onto your question though, I have skipped holds on a number of occasions doing sequences differently indoors, however I always thought that this was just due to body type/climbing style etc, rather a setter trying to place a decoy hold.
1
In reply to Martin W:
I thought it was pretty common place. Its a very helpful tool for learners (Or maybe anyone) trying to read routes.
My 9 yr old daughter (Or for example someone who is small in general) has to read a route before attempting to climb it. Firstly, its good practice and secondly, it ensures she doesn't waste energy going off on tangents when trying to work out a way to climb it which isn't always the way the routesetter intended because of her size.
Its a very important skill for her to be able to read the route before even touching the wall. By putting extra holds in which either are of zero use or sometimes even there to waste climbers energy its a really good way of learning. Its often used in competitions too, just to confuse the competitor
I thought it was pretty common place. Its a very helpful tool for learners (Or maybe anyone) trying to read routes.
My 9 yr old daughter (Or for example someone who is small in general) has to read a route before attempting to climb it. Firstly, its good practice and secondly, it ensures she doesn't waste energy going off on tangents when trying to work out a way to climb it which isn't always the way the routesetter intended because of her size.
Its a very important skill for her to be able to read the route before even touching the wall. By putting extra holds in which either are of zero use or sometimes even there to waste climbers energy its a really good way of learning. Its often used in competitions too, just to confuse the competitor
2
In reply to Climbing Pieman:
I'm 5ft 2, my partner is 5ft 11. We both did this one tonight, no dyno required. It's awkward and perhaps not obvious but the grade seems fair.
> Did you try the pink line 41? Most climbers who try it question whether a 5+ can have a dyno move on the overhang. Management are sticking to the 5+ grade!
I'm 5ft 2, my partner is 5ft 11. We both did this one tonight, no dyno required. It's awkward and perhaps not obvious but the grade seems fair.
2
In reply to Angrypenguin:
On the other hand, there aren't any rules about which holds you can and can't use. (Not at the level of outdoor climbing I operate at, anyway.) Similarly, nature doesn't impose artificial rules about what is and isn't a hold (although if it comes off in your hand, then it wasn't a hold!) For example, at the wall in question the default rule on the top rope routes is that features aren't allowed at all. At another wall a ways up the road features are allowed for feet only.
So, yes, we all know (I hope) that climbing walls are an artificial construct and nothing like 'real' climbing. I guess the question is where do you draw the line between acceptable/unavoidable artificiality and playing perverse games with the punters. Your argument seems to be that the outdoors is full of decoy/red herring holds - but then at least (to pick up on Andy Say's point) those holds aren't painted bright colours to make you think that you really ought be using them. You try them, and if they're obviously no use, you move on. If someone deliberately puts a hold on the wall that's no use then IMO they're playing games with you, which I find annoying. Cunningly difficult or non-obvious sequences are fine. Deliberate misdirection feels unnecessarily mean.
> You should see outdoor climbing... it's even worse. They don't even paint the holds the same colour.
On the other hand, there aren't any rules about which holds you can and can't use. (Not at the level of outdoor climbing I operate at, anyway.) Similarly, nature doesn't impose artificial rules about what is and isn't a hold (although if it comes off in your hand, then it wasn't a hold!) For example, at the wall in question the default rule on the top rope routes is that features aren't allowed at all. At another wall a ways up the road features are allowed for feet only.
So, yes, we all know (I hope) that climbing walls are an artificial construct and nothing like 'real' climbing. I guess the question is where do you draw the line between acceptable/unavoidable artificiality and playing perverse games with the punters. Your argument seems to be that the outdoors is full of decoy/red herring holds - but then at least (to pick up on Andy Say's point) those holds aren't painted bright colours to make you think that you really ought be using them. You try them, and if they're obviously no use, you move on. If someone deliberately puts a hold on the wall that's no use then IMO they're playing games with you, which I find annoying. Cunningly difficult or non-obvious sequences are fine. Deliberate misdirection feels unnecessarily mean.
Post edited at 07:44
2
1
In reply to Martin W:
It's not a proper bouldering venue if the problems don't have rules!
> On the other hand, there aren't any rules about which holds you can and can't use. (Not at the level of outdoor climbing I operate at, anyway.)
It's not a proper bouldering venue if the problems don't have rules!
2
In reply to Martin W:
Outdoor routes can be riddled by decoy holds put there by nature (or Mountain Gods with a sense of humour)
Outdoor routes can be riddled by decoy holds put there by nature (or Mountain Gods with a sense of humour)
In reply to Angrypenguin:
Worse, at some venues they are all painted white! How are you meant to know which ones are yours?!!
> You should see outdoor climbing... it's even worse. They don't even paint the holds the same colour.
Worse, at some venues they are all painted white! How are you meant to know which ones are yours?!!
2
In reply to Martin W:
As a route setter, I never intentionally put in decoy holds. I do find that sometimes I need holds that others don't. I also have some ethics police that climb in our wall who insist that if a feature is past the edge of the panel, then it is not in unless there is also a hold past that same edge of the panel. I have been known to stick a random hold over the edge to tell them that those features are also in! I do try to make it a genuine part of the route where possible, but sometimes it just doesn't flow right if I do.
As a route setter, I never intentionally put in decoy holds. I do find that sometimes I need holds that others don't. I also have some ethics police that climb in our wall who insist that if a feature is past the edge of the panel, then it is not in unless there is also a hold past that same edge of the panel. I have been known to stick a random hold over the edge to tell them that those features are also in! I do try to make it a genuine part of the route where possible, but sometimes it just doesn't flow right if I do.
1
In reply to Angrypenguin:
It's in the indoor/training forum you tit.
> You should see outdoor climbing... it's even worse. They don't even paint the holds the same colour.
It's in the indoor/training forum you tit.
1
21
In reply to Martin W:
And my question is, does anyone seriously think that if you do a route without using all the holds you've somehow cheated? With the possible exception of the even more artificial situation of a meandering / low start on a bouldering wall, surely you get extra bragging rights if you don't even need all the holds they provide at the grade.
Surprisingly for someone who spends far too much time muttering about my lack of reach, I find I do this quite a lot by using a high step up or a feature. Or maybe I just don't have the stamina to do more moves than necessary.
> As a result of this experience, I have two not entirely serious questions:
> 1) Have other people encountered such attempts at apparent misdirection by a route setter?
> 2) Is such a practice regarded as ethical?
And my question is, does anyone seriously think that if you do a route without using all the holds you've somehow cheated? With the possible exception of the even more artificial situation of a meandering / low start on a bouldering wall, surely you get extra bragging rights if you don't even need all the holds they provide at the grade.
Surprisingly for someone who spends far too much time muttering about my lack of reach, I find I do this quite a lot by using a high step up or a feature. Or maybe I just don't have the stamina to do more moves than necessary.
1
In reply to Martin W:
Definitely not ethical, I think the BMC have a help line for this kind of thing.
Definitely not ethical, I think the BMC have a help line for this kind of thing.
5
In reply to Angrypenguin:
PMSL. Absolutely brilliant! Even if it was an 'indoor' question.
PMSL. Absolutely brilliant! Even if it was an 'indoor' question.
Post edited at 16:55
In reply to Martin W:
A rather serious answer:
It's not uncommon. it's the prerogative of the route setter.
Nothing wrong with making you think/work harder.
It is also worth remembering that setters do the best they can with a not entirely blank canvas... not many holds to choose from, limited T-nuts available, uneven surfaces, trying to squeeze up to 3 routes on one panel. As such sometimes (quite rare) they contrive some sequences and users find ways to bypass this!
A rather serious answer:
It's not uncommon. it's the prerogative of the route setter.
Nothing wrong with making you think/work harder.
It is also worth remembering that setters do the best they can with a not entirely blank canvas... not many holds to choose from, limited T-nuts available, uneven surfaces, trying to squeeze up to 3 routes on one panel. As such sometimes (quite rare) they contrive some sequences and users find ways to bypass this!
1
In reply to Climbing Pieman:
Yellow, panel 3. I did it again last night and confirmed my view that those holds can only be of any practical use to someone with an inside leg of about 40".
I had to check which route you meant when I was there last night. I'm pretty sure I've done that one in the past and didn't need to dyno - but then I am tallish. I did notice that it didn't seem to have a grade indicated.
In reply to girlymonkey:
At AR1 the default rule on the top rope routes is that features are not allowed (I'm sure I saw this written down somewhere once - certainly most climbers seem to work on that basis). This led to an interesting discussion with my partner last night where one route was described as "<colour> + all features". The debate revolved around whether the tufa and the arete - or indeed the pockets - counted as 'features'. Such fun we have when we go climbing together.
We do usually assume that bridging is not allowed unless there is a hold of the right colour on the adjacent wall.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
I certainly don't! I did state in my original post my questions were not entirely serious (and you even copied those words in to your answer). A number of people posting on this thread seem to have missed that. Perhaps I should have added a few winky smileys, too - some people seem to find those easier to understand than boring old traditional 'words'. Or perhaps some people need to brush up on their comprehension skills.
> If AR1, which line and route?
Yellow, panel 3. I did it again last night and confirmed my view that those holds can only be of any practical use to someone with an inside leg of about 40".
> Did you try the pink line 41? Most climbers who try it question whether a 5+ can have a dyno move on the overhang. Management are sticking to the 5+ grade!
I had to check which route you meant when I was there last night. I'm pretty sure I've done that one in the past and didn't need to dyno - but then I am tallish. I did notice that it didn't seem to have a grade indicated.
In reply to girlymonkey:
> I also have some ethics police that climb in our wall who insist that if a feature is past the edge of the panel, then it is not in unless there is also a hold past that same edge of the panel. I have been known to stick a random hold over the edge to tell them that those features are also in! I do try to make it a genuine part of the route where possible, but sometimes it just doesn't flow right if I do.
At AR1 the default rule on the top rope routes is that features are not allowed (I'm sure I saw this written down somewhere once - certainly most climbers seem to work on that basis). This led to an interesting discussion with my partner last night where one route was described as "<colour> + all features". The debate revolved around whether the tufa and the arete - or indeed the pockets - counted as 'features'. Such fun we have when we go climbing together.
We do usually assume that bridging is not allowed unless there is a hold of the right colour on the adjacent wall.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
> does anyone seriously think that if you do a route without using all the holds you've somehow cheated?
I certainly don't! I did state in my original post my questions were not entirely serious (and you even copied those words in to your answer). A number of people posting on this thread seem to have missed that. Perhaps I should have added a few winky smileys, too - some people seem to find those easier to understand than boring old traditional 'words'. Or perhaps some people need to brush up on their comprehension skills.
1
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...