UKC

Perusing winter route logbook entries I noticed a large number of entries from people claiming routes are undergraded.

Almost all of you are wrong. Here is why:

1) Grades are for average conditions. If you found it with a bit more rime than you generally like that does not mean the grade is wrong. It means you need to suck it up buttercup. And to those of you making comments like 'grade VI in today's nick', you know you're only kidding yourselves. You didn't climb a VI you climbed a V in heavy / difficult conditions. Good effort but just be happy with that, don't kick the arse out of it.

2) You probably climbed it with mono points and a pair of Nomics. The first ascenscionists probably climbed it with 12 point crampons and a pair of blunt Vertiges and found it to be that grade. With this in mind moaning about the grade makes you look churlish at best.

3) Just because you found it hard doesn't mean the grade is wrong. Maybe you had a bad day, maybe you're just a bit crap in general. That's fine, it's ok to be a bit crap, we can't all be Iain Small* but don't expect any sympathy and don't expect everyone else to validate your crapness by agreeing with your grading.

4) Grades are a band, not a point. Just because you hauled your arse up some soft touch at a given grade then had a 'mare on another route of the grade doesn't mean the second route needs upgrading.

5) 2 seasons in the Northern Corries does not an expert make. Nuff said.

6) Many winter routes are open to significant variation. Maybe you went the wrong way or missed a crucial hook?

7) Scottish winter climbing is tough, not macho BS tough mudder tough but real tough. Leave your ego at home, if you got a spanking take your medicine and learn to love it, don't go bleating about it online and looking for excuses. You're the problem, not the grade or your kit.

I think that's everything. For now anyway.

* There are probably days when even Iain Small isn't Iain Small.

In reply to DaveHK:
Right on! I think this rant should be mandatory for all future winter guidebooks in the grading section!

In reply to DaveHK:

in some cases, more likely a pair of blunt terrors

In reply to Doug:

We are all products of our era.

In reply to DaveHK:
I agree with all of that except that the grade does vary and is sometimes much easier and sometimes much harder depending on conditions. It’s not about claiming a grade VI when it’s a V though. That said you don’t see many people doing the opposite and fessing up to Aladdins mirror direct being a III when it’s very heavy build up like in 09/10 ish etc. Pretty sure they are happy to claim the grade mind.....

I think that uncertainty of what you’ll get is what it’s all about, but yeah many times if your sensible that is going to lead to retreat, pushing a little bit beyond the limits you thought you could do, or just an easier day.

When I’ve done something a bit beyond what I thought I should, I often reflect on how I’d do it differently next time, either that or realise I could do a bit more I guess.

In reply to DaveHK:

Two dislikes. Must be from some of those mealy mouthed, upgrade claiming invertebrates.

In reply to DaveHK:

Haha I’ll give you a thumbs up

In reply to CurlyStevo:


What's needed is my patented system for reporting the conditions encountered on any given ascent.

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=397394

In reply to DaveHK:

Gonna print this and put it on my wall.

(Your points don't just apply to Scottish winteror, indeed, climbing.)

In reply to DaveHK:

Ha Ha class!!

Get this in every Guidebook!

In reply to DaveHK:
>"There are probably days when even Iain Small isn't Iain Small."

It's *rumoured* that there was ONE day summer just gone, that he was finding F8a hard going...

EDIT: I should add that I didn't see it first hand so remain sceptical about the claim...

In reply to DaveHK:

Round of applause!

In reply to DaveHK:

Brilliant!

Keep up the good work.

In reply to DaveHK:


I agree completely Dave, we can't allow people to claim grades based purely on the conditions they happened to climb them in. The grade is the grade after all.

Which is why those claiming IX, 9 for a winter ascent of Steeple, for example, are only kidding themselves - it's an E2, ya punters! (Good effort though - it is a pretty tough E2).

In reply to DaveHK:

Bah humbug.
A good blagsman always blames the route.
That's not my ice route- the ice is too shattery.
That's not my mixed route- the rock is too hoary.
That's not my turf route- the turf is too airy.
That's not my Alpine route- the slopes are too avalanchy.
etc.

In reply to DaveHK:

It may have got even tougher. FB rumours swirling that Kingpin just had its first WA.

In reply to DaveHK:

Whilst I broadly agree with your sentiment, and appreciate the rant is slightly tongue in cheek (I hope), particularly for ice/snow routes, the grade can be very dependent on build up. sure modern tools etc really put everything in perspective, but the flip side to that is that yeh those guys in the 70's and 80's climbed with forks strapped to their feet and knives in their hands, but they also climbed at a time when half of the route would just be buried under snow!

nobody in their right mind can claim that this is grade IV! this pitch probably wasn't even there during the 1st ascent...

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153492269125749&set=a.1015330...

In reply to DaveHK:

Well said matey and so true!

In reply to DaveHK:

On the basis of your quality rant can we have Tower Ridge downgraded back to a III where it was for decades rather the IV it now gets because lots of people who basically aren't up to climbing a very long grade III get benighted on it?
Wasn't it once considered to be the definitive grade III ridge/buttress/mixed climb anyway like Point 5 is the definitive grade V gully?

In reply to DaveHK:
Hmmm, I remember doing the Screen one November, after 3 days hard frost, it was frozen solid or I wouldn't be here posting, but it wasn't a grade 4...
I also remember doing Route Major, Gorms, one October and in the pub in Aviemore some fucker called Blyth said nobody climbed that yet, but then my partner arrived who knew said fucker and he had to apologise and get back to harping on about fucking avalanches and boring everybody to death....
I suppose, in defence of Blyth, we had to use a point of aid on that rib move....

In reply to DaveHK:
A bit harsh but you’re mostly right. I would disagree on the first point though - depending on conditons, a winter route can be a grade harder or a grade easier and it’s fair to make a note that something was hard or easy for the grade on the day due to conditions. If something is hard for the grade due to conditions and you get up it ok, it shows you’re a well rounded climber at the given grade and can perhaps try something at the next grade.

In reply to pec:


Except once Point Five is hooked out, it certainly isn’t a V any more... Hooked out ice basically takes a grade away.

In reply to Misha:


Misha, you can either be a part of the problem or a part of the solution.

In reply to DaveHK:

Disagree on a few points.

1) I'd rather take the grade which the route actually was on the day. Just because Tracheaotomy might be VI,7 in typical snowed-up rock conditions, doesn't mean it wasn't a V,5 when I did it with good snow-ice and rime. Same goes for routes which were harder on the day. The guidebook grade is just a meaningless number on those days when the route is in reality much easier or harder.

2) Yes equipment for much less good in the past, but modern interpretations of grades are also different to how they were in the past, and this really is the nub of the matter. You don't see many folk claiming VI (let alone V) for Shield Direct!

3) Just because a guidebook says a route is a certain grade, doesn't mean it is necessarily correct.

In reply to Doug:


Smiths Route V, first ascent with a single axe.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

If I do a route and it was tough on the day, it's still the same route. I'd just log the conditions. You wouldn't climb a damp greasy VS and log it as E1.

In reply to DaveHK:

Nice post.

Another thing on a similar note that makes me laugh when I see it in logbooks:

If you chose to climb a route only to find the top crux pitch wasn't formed then you can't claim to have 'finished' the route. You simply misjudged conditions.

In reply to Webster:

He's certainly got enough gear on his harness for grade VI...

In reply to Webster:


Sorry, I'm confused. Are you claiming it was easier or harder than IV? Looks about III in the photo, but I suppose it could be deceptive.

In reply to DaveHK:

Very few posts cause me to hit the like button but this is one of them.

In reply to Mr. Lee:

Yeah I agree. The same thing keeps cropping up with people doing part of a boulder problem and then jumping off and logging it as completed. I think it's symptomatic of some people feeling a need to 'achieve' bending the truth if needs be so they can say they've achieved something.

A winter example would be people claiming to have done north buttress on buachaille etive mor and abseiling off after the chimneys. That's not doing the route, no tick for that, that's a retreat. Nothing wrong with retreating and it was probably still fun but it's not doing the route.

In reply to Misha:


I remember soloing Zero in the incredible conditions of '86. Bucket steps all the way. It wasn't really any harder than II. Maybe III because it was sustained buckets.

In reply to LakesWinter:


What about abbing off before the last pitch of Savage Slit? Always seems a bit rubbish to me.

In reply to DaveHK:

Climbed Andromeda a few years back when everything was totally banked out in the Northern Coires. I went 40m without a runner up the main pitch. Not a clue where to start digging for gear as the features were completely buried (I did make some attempts before realising it was futile). Like a half pipe that day. No way was it IV,4 in those conditions. Easily V,4 given it was essentially gearless tech 4. Also largely reliant on footwork due to bad axes and difficult to reverse. So in summary I'd say that whilst most stuff is just hard/easy for the grade there's definitely occasions when conditions can up the grade a full notch (or lower it).

In reply to summo:


The route is the same, yes, but the grade will be different. Dave Kerr is correct that routes are graded for 'average' conditions, but I think everyone accepts that something can feel a grade harder or easier depending on the conditions found on the day. So why not log it as such - it's a personal record after all.

Generally summer routes are different - as most routes are best when dry, that is what they're graded for.

In reply to Mr. Lee:

Exactly. I think it's generally accepted that with many winter routes you could often more or less switch the overall and tech grades about, i.e. V,6 / VI,5 or V,4 / IV,5 (Andromeda felt like the latter when I did it in fairly typical conditions).

In reply to DaveHK:

When grading moved over to the two tier system an exercise was carried out to map the old grades over to the new system. One interesting question that arose, relative to a small number of routes, was whether to grade them for the typical conditions encountered each year, or to give them a grade that was reflective of the very good conditions that prevailed when most people climbed them. An example of this is The Fly Direct, given VII 6, but probably more like VI 5 when most people climb it (back then at least). For a number of years in the early ‘90s it was never in better than VII 6 condition, and therefore had very few ascents. There was a year though, sometime in the mid ‘90s, when it was in fantastic condition, more like VI 5, and, once the word got out, had dozens of ascents.

I was a definitely a proponent of it being given VII 6, arguing that someone was in for a hell of a shock if they got on it in typical conditions expecting VI 5. Of course, if you get on it expecting VII 6, and it is in VI 5 condition, you might feel a little bit justified in your disparaging remarks about the guidebook writer (he can take it). But know also that you will be walking off the top short-changed, having missed out on the full challenge of one of the best lines in the country.

In reply to DaveHK:

It's not unusual for me to say that rock routes are overgraded. However it's very rare for me to say that a winter route is overgraded or in easy conditions (apart from hooked out ice lines). Must be a reflection of the fact that I'm crap at winter climbing...

In reply to DaveHK:
Agreed, adapted version to your thread from a cycling perspective AKA ” Velominati The Rules”

#5: HARDEN THE F*CK UP

#20: THERE ARE ONLY THREE REMEDIES FOR PAIN
These are:

If your quads start to burn, shift forward to use your hamstrings and calves, or
If your calves or hamstrings start to burn, shift back to use your quads, or
If you feel wimpy and weak, meditate on Rule #5 and train more.

In reply to DaveHK:

No this is not correct. In fact due to land uplift Scotland is rising whilst England sinks. This means that the crags of the Northern Corries (which is where the winter climbing is) are getting steeper ergo the climbs are getting harder. Additionally snow crystals are changing due to a global increase in temperature making pulling on ice picks much harder. This is why athletes are finding a little bit harder, even if they have the latest trousers.

In reply to Rich W Parker:

Just imagine how much even harder it is though for those of us without the latest trousers! It's desperate I tell you, desperate. All the IIIs I've done were definitely hard IV due to my lacking in the trouser department...

In reply to TobyA:
My trousers are usually brown. Not sure if that helps or hinders.

In reply to Robert Durran:


seriously? that's a joke right?

about 15m of overhanging ice? which grading systems have you been reading!

plus what you cant see is the at least tech 6 chock stone pitch further up the gully...

In reply to Misha:


My knees often are by the end of the day. Nothing like a good bit of grovelling! Never quite sure if the cunning use of knees, elbows, bum cheeks, chin, helmet etc should add to or subtract from the style points though...

In reply to DaveHK:
This is ridiculous. Route grading changes all the time, I mean what if the turf is not frozen? That makes it much harder & you get really dirty.

In reply to Aonach:

absolutely - and if you are hungover and your partner just dropped an axe harder still

In reply to Webster:

No not a joke. It looks about III in the photo.


If you say so - as I said, appearances can be deceptive.

What route is it by the way?

In reply to Webster:



Maybe gravity was misbehaving that week. Ice doesn't typically overhang like you describe. It can bulge or be undercut but the steepest ice pillars and faces in the world are no steeper than vertical.

In reply to Robert Durran:
Looks like False Rumour Gully on Beinn Dorain.

In reply to Lamb:


I was thinking it looked like Torridonian sandstone.

In reply to Tricadam:
It’s PART of the style!

In reply to Misha:


Amen!

In reply to Misha:

Maybe I need to sew on some Kevlar-studded knee patches for those "COME ON!!!" moments where you're screaming at the Paramo to be more grippy.

In reply to Webster:




On its way to you now: a medal for bravery and persistence in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds.

In reply to Webster:



We did that route a day or so after you. The ice wasn't overhanging, it's just it wasn't touching down or thin enough at the bottom that you knocked it all down. It's 1 short ice pitch then literally a move over the chalk stone and a plod after that. I thought the grade is about right, although in those lean conditions it maybe felt a notch harder technically? Maybe like IV 5. That was my take on it.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10153608149108439&set=pb.756793438....

In reply to Tricadam:


No, you just need some of those old furry Helly Hansen fibre pile trousers. They stick like shit to verglas.

In reply to Robert Durran:

My old salopettes had furry knee pads that were a godsend. Unfortunately they finally fell to bits and I have had to replace them. The replacement is shiny.

Doomed.

In reply to Martin McKenna - Rockfax:


That one does make it look harder than III !

In reply to Mr. Lee:


No, it can very easily overhang, a bulge creates an overhang by definition, especially if the rock it is forming down is already vertical

In reply to Robert Durran:

as others have said. false rumour gully above bridge of orchy.

and you clearly have a very warped opinion of what grade III looks like! even if its only 'vertical' that still makes it grade V

In reply to Lamb:


correct

In reply to Martin McKenna - Rockfax:

Alright no need to be billy big balls, your photo clearly shows that the ice is overhanging right above your head! sure you bridge out but the ice is very much overhanging, or undercut, call it what you will the end result is the same. and like you say, it hadn't touched down, again making it undercut, or overhanging at the bottom, again, same thing!

sure its a short route, but that doesn't diminish from its technical challenge.

In reply to Webster:

I climbed that gully in summer, there was no ice at all, so I couldn’t place any screws, very bold. I think I’ll take VI 3, my first VI.

Grading climbs is an arbitrary benchmark, but I’m obsessed with getting the highest numbers, hence I think we should all get to decide our own grade at the time of ascent.

In reply to Tricadam:


The Aspira trousers are pretty good...at least the re-enforced knee / backside pads seem grippy enough for my liking...I use my knees all the time due to hopeless flexibility! The more modern Endura/Ventura stuff doesn't really grip so well.

In reply to DaveHK:

I have just applied the 200th 'LIKE' to the OP. What do I win?

In reply to DaveHK:

I think discussing Scottish grades is missing the point. I thought it was all about the experience...

In reply to Webster:



In the picture it looks like a very short lived ice corner. Given the only information I had, which is what the picture looks like and that the given grade was IV, but that you disagreed with it, I still stick with a best guess of III - it simply looks too trivial and short to be V.

In reply to Ramon Marin:


You are living in the past.. Scottish winter is now mainstream and is therefore, sadly, all about the grade now.

In reply to Shani:


You get to share the OP's smug sense of self satisfaction at putting down lesser climbers than yourselves!

In reply to Webster:

Ah yes, you have reminded me exactly why I never comment on grade threads. How silly of me

I gave you a constructive reply on what we found on the day, the reason being is it happened to be at the same time you did it. Grading this V 6 or whatever would put it in the realms of other ice routes like Minus Two Gully or Mega Route X and harder than many of the other big Ben ice routes.

The reason I landed on IV 5 is because it's a 15 meter section of ice then a 1 move wonder round a chalk stone. You're about as committed as Trump is to the environment. With the route in good condition I'm sure it would feel a good deal easier again.

Anyway, I shall fade back into the background, behind this wall of code where I belong.

Over and out.
Billy Big Baws

In reply to Webster:


I'm not disputing that ice can form into an overhang. I was disputing your '15m of overhanging ice' statement, which is more than just a bulge and nothing like what I was seeing in your photo.

In reply to Fiona Reid:

I did try a pair once but found them a bit cumbersome. I use some old style Cascadas modified with the addition of crampon patches and a snow gaiter. Maybe I should sew some chopped up Dachsteins onto the knees. They grip snow like nobody's business. Would certainly be a ... unique look.

In reply to DaveHK:

Post of the year?

In reply to Martin McKenna - Rockfax:

Definitely doesn't look like a IV in your photo! However, the line being incomplete may have something to do with that...

In reply to DaveHK:


Surely it's the variability of conditions that is a key part of the wonder of winter climbing: the route is never quite the same twice. There's no contradiction in saying that a route should be graded IV for average conditions but could, in the wide range of what is normal in winter, be as easy as bog standard III on one occasion and as hard as standard V on another. (And the variation could be wider! And some routes' grading specifically reflects this, e.g. II/IV.) Perhaps gullies vary the most in the this regard: bomber neve and hooked out ice versus thin conditions with multiple wee mixed challenges around chockstones. Folks describing a III as "II today" or "IV today" is therefore entirely appropriate, and a very different thing from suggesting a re-grading of the route - which will of course occasionally be reasonable, particularly where the route itself has changed, whether due to rockfall or unseasonable gardening.

In reply to Webster:
Webster mate.
You're getting pumped on this.
Time to kick the ball up onto the slates and go home for your tea.

In reply to Tricadam:

Ah, I removed the foam inserts on the backside - it was way too much like wearing a nappy. I left the knee padding in though. The material on the backside + knees is reenforced and seems to grip quite nicely. I rather like the idea of Dachstein type patches.

In reply to DaveHK:

Well said.

I've always treated Scottish winter grading with a combination of caution and amusement

In reply to DaveHK:

100% agreed. Grades are trophies and not a guide to the difficulty of the route on the day. People shouldn't be claiming higher grades because the route was in difficult condition. Think about it the other way, what would be the point in climbing Point 5 in stepped out condition if you can only claim a III for it?? Guidebook grades are sacred, end of. It is part of the general erosoin of climbing ethics which devalues the achievements of others and makes climbing less satisfying.

In reply to Stellar Meteor:


LOL. Not entirely sure what you're trying to say here, but I got a good giggle out of it. Speaking of Point 5, I'll confess to being disappointed at getting the lead on the Rogue Pitch only to find that it was in grade IV nick that day (not very bulgy). Pitch 2 was friggin awesome though! Worth every penny.

As an example of the way gullies change, the first time I climbed Raeburn's on Lochnagar, it was high end I, very easy II at most: banked out, super neve all the way, amenable chewy ice on the slightly steeper section, and virtually no cornice. The second time, in very lean, icy conditions, it was more like IV,5, with some perplexing mixed moves around chockstones. The two outings couldn't have been more different and were equally superb. And neither experience means the guidebook grade should change!

In reply to Stellar Meteor:

PS Photo evidence of that non-bulgy day on the Rogue Pitch: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10101530956423461&set=a.1010153...

In reply to Stellar Meteor:

I don't think this is about kidding yourself and looking for false 'trophies' by claiming to have done as hard a grade as possible. It's about being honest with yourself as to how hard the route actually was on the day you climbed it, not a different day when you didn't climb it and the route was in easier or harder nick.

Guidebook grades are not, and will never be, 'sacred'. Otherwise why do they often change? And the FA (understandably) doesn't always get it right.

In reply to Webster:

Overhanging? That ice is not even vertical. IV looks about right.

In reply to DaveHK:

How disappointing Dave Kerr.

Now I'm getting on a bit and have to use an alpinstock for support I was hoping to limp & crawl up a few grade I gullies this winter, and as they were going to be sooooo difficult and hard as I've not got the latest axes and technical this and technical that I was going to sort of log them as grade VII as they are as much more of a struggle now.

So I'm out of luck.....

In reply to Webster:
Possibly a bit late replying, just seen this though.

That pitch is False Rumour Gully. Think it was my second grade IV, during my first season climbing (94). On that occasion I climbed ice on the left wall, hammering snargs in for protection. It was fat and IV seemed fair.

I have climbed it another 2 time (I think), always in less fat conditions, placing rock runners instead of screws. It was in thin shape today, still some ways to go!

Crackin' wee route, well worth doing when in!

Stuart

In reply to drunken monkey:



I was thinking about the the start of the M74.

In reply to Webster:

If it makes you feel any better I've taken an 8-10m fall off False Rumour Gully. Didn't change the grade though.

In reply to Lion Bakes:


Looks about II to me.