UKC

On 22 October 2017, Angela Eiter became the first woman in history to climb 9b by repeting Adam Ondra's La Planta de de Shiva at Villanueva del Rosario. At a time when only two women have climbed 9a+ and only a dozen (between 10 and 17) or so men have climbed 9b, this is certainly on par with Ondra's ascent of Silence, 9c, or Nalle Hukkataival's ascent of Burden of Dreams, 9A.

Read more

In reply to UKC News:

Still buzzing off this news. I remember seeing a video of Jakob's 2nd ascent (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmfkrjlsFzU) and it looks so very very hard.

Historic ascents just keep happening this year.

In reply to UKC News:

Blown away by this historic ascent by Angy. The interview mentions her work, does anybody know what she does for work if she is not a full time pro?

In reply to UKC News:

I gather this is a 2 pitch route, so Angela has effectively redpointed both pitches, albeit individually? Is it the same grade whether one does it 'big wall style' (for want of a better term!) or not? No criticism implied, just some more info on the route itself might have been nice.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

No...


From how I understood, she climbed the 1st pitch (high 8?) and fiddled around with the start of the extension. After that she focused on getting the extension dialed in. And finally redpointed the whole line.


A similar example would be the original Lafaille Biographie (couldn't do the whole line, so added and anchor "mid pitch and called it good... @ 8c or something). Then Sharma worked the full line to the top (effectively "pitch 2" on top of the orig. Biographie) and called the "new line" Realization.


Stellar effort fro Angie btw, but considering her "main" discipline, I'm sure a stamina fest like this suited her really well..

In reply to UKC News:

Her arms in that photo!!!!

No it is not, you're comparing apples and oranges.

What you are saying here is that a repeat of an existing line (two grades below absolute maximum at the moment) is comparable with establishing new lines that both pushed the envelope of difficulties further than anyone thought possible. Raising the bar and going in to a new level of difficulties that you don't know if it is possible at all, takes a lot more than just to repeat an existing line as all that have ever worked on FAs know.

It is by all means a historic ascent, it's 9b after all. Women are just as capable as men so there is no need to hype it up just because of her gender, it is a 9b ascent by a climber. Women are better at some things while men are better at other stuff. Reaches can be longer if you are small but hold are bigger if you have small fingers and you get less pumped if there's no so much weight to pull up the wall.

To be honest, women are just lazy, which is obvious by looking at competition climbers and some other ascents by women over the years. They were capable of climbing at this level years ago, but none took the time! Just look at the progress this year. No way can that kind of progress happen so fast, it was long in the making which means women were just as capable as men on some routes even more capable.

If we generalize a bit, men are pushing the limits and always have to prove something to someone, women don't have that tendency so strongly expressed, so they take it easy, they only do things when it suits them while men have to do it by nature.

Women 9b+, 9c, it is possible now, we just need a willing participant. Go girls!

In reply to UKC News:

Every time I read interviews like this I'm struck by the level of dedication and commitment to a project that is just on such a different planet to anything I can imagine.

In reply to MarkyH:



I see you registered a profile today just to post this. 0/10, boring misogynistic trolling.

In reply to slab_happy:
I see it worked, you answered

And since you're taking my words out of context, you forgot to include my quote: Women are just as capable as men

Or did you forget that on purpose?

In reply to MarkyH:

"Someone spotted that I'm an obvious troll, so THAT MEANS I WON! Haha, you fell into my cunning trap!"

Really playing that three-dimensional chess there, dude.

In reply to slab_happy:
Yes! That's the way, go of topic and start dealing with my comments, some chess you're playing there. Good for you.

Oh and by the way, I was not trolling, just stating my opinion. I am being called a troll because of you.

In reply to UKC News:
And another thing.
Most of people congratulating her are the ones that actually think of women as the weaker sex, otherwise they would not be so excited when a woman does something that is clearly within her capabilities. They are the real mysogynists.

''Wow a woman did this or that, that is really impressive.'' As if they wouldn't believe they could, how degrading is that?!

I for one, was expecting this years ago, but women just weren't interested in it, otherwise they would have done it, it is a fact. If you want something, you go for it.

In reply to MarkyH:

This is such a naive, skewed view of feminism, and of what has held women back from fulfilling their potential over the years, that I genuinely can't think of a way to reply to you in a way that will make things clearer for you.

So instead, I'm just going to say that I'm really chuffed for Angy - What an incredible achievement.

I'll just leave this here: http://www.planetmountain.com/en/news/interviews/sasha-digiulian-the-state-...

Straight off Sasha: is climbing a question of sexes? I.e., do we need need to make a distinction between male and female ascents?
I believe that men and women are equally capable in climbing. Physiologically, there are differences. Though, climbing offers a multitude of style and potential that enables women to achieve as hard, maybe even harder, climbs as men.

In reply to MarkyH:

In your quest to acknowledge equality of potential, which itself is laudable, you are overlooking the very real and very significant inequality of expectation. To achieve beyond the achievements of one's peers is exceptionally hard. To do so on an international stage much harder still. And like it or not, when considering sporting performance most of our society regards as peers mainly those of the same sex. This might not be right, it might not be fair, but it's undeniable. Psychologically we are measured, and usually measure ourselves, by the yardstick of our peers. It therefore should come as no surprise that a female climber exceeding the performance of her peer group in such a startling fashion is seen as being hugely impressive. That's because it is hugely impressive. You could argue that it's proportionally less impressive than if a male climber were to push standards by a similar amount as compared to his peer group, and your point might have some merit. But to imply that such a leap is pretty much inconsequential because people in a different peer group have climbed as hard or harder is bordering on wilfully blind to the realities of gender expectations in our society.

In reply to john arran:

I think the male/female thing in climbing is particularly interesting because men and women "compete" on equal terms in the sense that they can just go out and try the same routes in a completely unsegregated way. So we shall probably soon see whether there is any reason why women can't climb as hard as men. The nearest similar activity I can think of is gymnastics - is there any reason why women shouldn't perform just as well as men? We shall never know as long as they do different disciplines. Might sport climbing be the first physical "game" where the distinction between men and women becomes completely obsolete?

In reply to Robert Durran:

I'd argue mixed climbing/drytooling was/is already there, even before sport climbing.

-The best female climbers can climb outdoor routes that are just as hard as the top male climbers.

-Male and female climbers compete on the same competition courses, and even though there's a female "category", top women often outperform some or all men (Ines Papert in particular has won the overall on various comps in the past).

In reply to MarkyH:
Gosh, how long has 9c existed? A couple of months? And how many people have climbed 9b+?

I think your point (women lagging behind?) may have had some more merit if a whole heap of men were climbing a grade or two harder for many years. Personally at this moment I think this is as significant as Ondra's ascent (and I'm not usually one to get worked up about repeats). It was certainly much more unexpected - you always knew Ondra was going to create the next level. In time it won't be, as others will add to the tally.

In reply to HeMa:



OK thanks

In reply to UKC News:

Well she's defo got 9b guns, that's for sure. Her bicep looks about the same weight as Alex Megos. Well jealous.

In reply to MarkyH:

Your argument rests on a huge assumption that men and women are equally capable of climbing. That may or may not turn out to be true. There are obvious differences between the sexes. You acknowledge this when you say: "Reaches can be longer if you are small but hold are bigger if you have small fingers and you get less pumped if there's no so much weight to pull up the wall.". Competition climbing has two adult categories, men and women. If, as you claim, they are equally capable why not just have men and women's competition combined?

You've also completely ignored the psychology of climbing hard and pushing the limits. Having a high grade can be a bigger mental barrier than having no grade at all when you're trying a new route. When you try a new route you've no idea how hard it is, you just work on the moves and see if it's possible for you to do. It's only when complete it you can give an honest appraisal of the grade and by then it's too late for that to be a barrier.


That seems a strange comment. The same could be said of men too. Why did the climbers of the eighties not climb 9b? Surely they were just as capable? I think it's all down to psychology and the expectations of the era, nothing to do with laziness or not taking the time.