UKC

The BMC have just started a National leading ladder at several walls in the UK. The winners will compete in a Grand Final at the end of the winter.

All can compete, but the easiest routes are F6b.

Find out more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Stirring Mick?

I never thought I'd see the day when one could seemingly seriously refer to Fr6b, which you can still get points if you work, being described as an elitist grade. Redpointing Fr6b on a wall isn't exactly a notable feat.

Also, once again, the actual meaning of the word elitism has been lost in the attempts to stir up indignation and hype. There is almost no situation within climbing where elitism is actually the correct description to use.

Ho-hum.

AJM

In reply to AJM:

No. It is a genuine concern.

We are allowed to question these days.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: i don't know whether this was designed to be a 'grassroots' event. if it was, then the entry level of 6b is clearly a bad decision, but then if you have the entry level at 5, there may perhaps be too many entrants and the whole thing will collapse in an administartive nightmare.

tony

In reply to AJM:

Not that I'm interested in competition climbing, but it's not the 6b that's the issue, it's rather that it's the entry point.

You're dead right though; it's not elitism. It seems about right for a national event.

In reply to Tony Strutt:
You may well be right that that is why they're making it so restrictive.

I think it's a real shame that they've left the top age category as a catch all of 46+. A person of nearly 80 who climbs 'only' 6a is extremely impressive, and I would've liked to see the achievement of people like that celebrated.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
I agree that you're only going to attract the higher grade climbers. I can't believe this was ever intended to be anything other than an elitist competition to attract hard climbers for the British team!
If it was intended to be "grassroots" then they're clearly aiming for the wrong people or have a very skewed idea of what grade the majority of climbers climb at. I certainly won't be entering - what's the point of travelling all the way round the country when 6b / 6c is your top grade anyway?!
I would say that in all probability 6b is the grade the average punter climbs at. This is certainly not a competition for the majority.

In reply to Mick Ryan -

Dear Mick,

Whilst I agree entirely that including easier graded routes could be a great opportunity to broaden participation I hope this article and provocative headline does not undermine or demoralise those who have worked hard (ie Rab and Nick Colton and Commercial Wall Managers) to get this pilot scheme off the ground.

As background, primary aim of setting up the Leading Ladder as it was explained to me by Nick was to provide more opportunity for aspirant and current competition adult climbers to practice and measure themselves - hence the higher grades.

The strategy was more top-down rather than bottom-up as it were.

It would be good to get a measure of how interested or indifferent other posters and parents of children climbing in the 5-6b range would be in participating if lower grade routes were included.

A petition of enough interest on this thread would I am sure encourage the inclusion of lower grade routes (and maybe remove the age limit) if not this year then maybe next.

Best, Simon

In reply to Tony Strutt:


Perhaps with some easier routes: Fr 5,Fr 5+, Fr 6a, Fr 6a+ you would get more people psyched to have a go, which means more people get a taste of competition climbing and appreciate it more.

Also, lowering the grade, opening it to more people, would mean more people through the doors of the UK's climbing walls. Climbing wall owners would like that.

In reply to Simon Lee:

That needs to be explained to all.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Hmmm.....

I have to say I find it hard to imagine anyone but the extremely keen entering the competition - you'll be able to climb the routes without entering, so theres only point in entering if you actually intend to knock out the 2000-odd miles of driving you'll probably have to do in order to visit each wall even once during the period its routes are there.

If you are that keen on involving yourself in a competition which requires that much faff, I just can't see you not having the base level of enthusiasm and perhaps more importantly competitiveness which would probably lead to you being able to already climb Fr6b and above. People who are keen enough on indoor climbing that they would consider entering a competition like this being unable to manage at least the lower 2 routes on the ladder at each venue - I'm skeptical, unless we are talking about children in which case I agree that there should be different routes for the kids competition, if only because otherwise they will show me up.

If it were a particular wall that wasn't setting any easy routes, perhaps I would agree with you, but I don't think the grade range is going to be a problem given the self-selection of the contestants as people who are that keen on indoor climbing and indoor climbing competitions that they are prepared to drive such a long way to do it. That level of keen-ness to me translates to being good enough for the grade spread chosen.

AJM

In reply to rginns:

Surely the point is anyone who is going to take competing seriously will be past the Fr6b level in no time ?

hell, even I can get up the odd selected 6b and I'm fat and unfit.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


Its all a bit late this though - the Leading Ladder started yesterday I think.

In reply to AJM:

Well said. Elitism is a much overused word, usually by the wanna haves.

In reply to AJM: I have to say I find it hard to imagine anyone but the extremely keen entering the competition - you'll be able to climb the routes without entering, so theres only point in entering if you actually intend to knock out the 2000-odd miles of driving you'll probably have to do in order to visit each wall even once during the period its routes are there.



I thought this misconception might arise - you only have to go to 3 (?) to submit your scorecard

In reply to GrahamD:

From the BMC website: nothing is said about being serious.

"The BMC Leading Ladder is a new, fun competition. Taking part is an excellent way to improve your climbing standards. It's also a great way to get fit - and stay fit - over the winter months."

Simon said above however:

"As background, primary aim of setting up the Leading Ladder as it was explained to me by Nick was to provide more opportunity for aspirant and current competition adult climbers to practice and measure themselves - hence the higher grades."

How about full disclosure please, publicly?

In reply to Simon Lee:

And the points made here ... that it's excluding, and in particular, excluding in relation to age... were made before it started. And no-one took any notice ... that doesn't mean we're all going to be quiet now. It's a bad call, shoving everyone over 46 in together, and I'm not going to stop saying so.

In reply to Simon Lee:

How wrong you are. More would enter if it started at Fr 5 rather than Fr 6b.

In reply to Simon Lee:

My sincere apologies Simon.

I did skim through the rules, but missed that fact.

That makes it sound a bit more reasonable, although I would argue that unless you are based very near to three of those walls you still have some sort of self-selection - I certainly wouldn't bother, since the nearest walls are 30 (Calshot), 50-60 (Bristol) and further (somewhere else, didn't really look at the list, Guildford or London?) miles away from me. You need to be fairly keen on indoor climbing as a fun activity in its own right rather than a training medium before the idea of going further simply to visit another wall becomes appealing......

AJM

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Is that an unfounded opinion in the same way mine is, or do you have any sort of evidence to back up the way you are stating it there as a fact?

AJM

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: How about full disclosure please, publicly?


I am not aware of a conspiracy. The development probably went something like this:

Initial aim - provide opportunity for comp climbers.

Secondary aim extend the competition to all.

Tactical error - starting grade too high

In reply to Simon Lee:


And using archaic age banding.

In reply to gingerkate:


They made their decisions.
The event is happening.
Be supportive whilst its running.
Evaluate its succes at the end.


If there is too much hassle/negativity there wouldnt be much motivation to hold the Leading Ladder again next year at all.

In reply to Simon Lee:

Bollocks Simon.

I am fully supportive of this event as I am of all BMC activities.

In fact I shall be spending my time reporting on it and helping to make it a success.

However, some have questions. Let them be asked, and answered.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

What, they start all the way down in the F6s?? Jeez what is this, McClimbing for the masses. Screw that, people need to try a bit harder.

In reply to Fiend:
So you'll be climbing harder than that when you're 75 will you? Cool.

Or are you saying that climbers in the 70s matter less than climbers in their 20s and 30s?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: I am fully supportive of this event

Disingenuous ?

You choose to raise this as an issue at the start of the Ladder which is not a great way to launch an event and when it is to late to change the rules and the routes.

In reply to Simon Lee:

What?! Good lord.

In reply to Fiend: my girlfriend is very happy indeed leading about severe, and climbs all over the country doing so. why should she try harder? will she be happier if she climbs E1?
you are obviously the sort of climber who climbs for the grade, and no more. remember "the best climber is th one who's having the most fun"

In reply to Simon Lee:
All this was said before when there was plenty of time to change it.

In reply to Simon Lee:

You comments do the BMC or this leading ladder no favours at all Simon.

In reply to Fiend: Here here. If you want to represent you country at the olympics you have to put in the sweat, blood and tears. If you want to play for Man City you have to put in the sweat, blood and tears. And if you want to enter a national climbing competition you should also have to put in the sweat, blood and tears.

There is no point in a competition for all, what does it gain?

And its not like we can't measure ourselves against the competitors anyway.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
Hear hear.

I was just mildly irritated before Simon said his bit ... having been told that I mustn't question mumsy else she'll take away my choccies ... I'm now bloody cross! I thought the BMC had jettisoned that sort of mindset ages ago. Perhaps no one told Simon...

In reply to Fiend:

This post typifies a problem in UK climbing: elitist and arrogance. No wonder some events are badly attended.

Now elitism has its place, for example we don't want all the bold routes dumbing down so anyone can lead them. As you say Mr. McFiend, "people need to try a bit harder." An appropriate comment in those circumstances.

But a national leading ladder, I would have thought it should have been more inclusive.....so more people can "take part" have "fun," "improve their climbing standards," a "great way to get fit - and stay fit - over the winter months."

In reply to gingerkate: All this was said before when there was plenty of time to change it.


Quite. I also emailed similar concerns to Nick as well in August. It was good effort getting it off the ground despite being flawed. Lets hope it is changed for the better next year if its run again.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


How will entering a competition you have no chance of winning motivate you?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

And for those who would like to compete but are not at the grade yet they could put in the time and effort to be up to scratch for next years event. And all these will still apply. They will care more when they enter too because of the effort they have made.

In reply to Tony Strutt:

Are there other sports where this line is used so much? And is it in fact an opinion which holds true in other countries, or is it a particularly UK (or English-speaking, its Lowe isn't it and I can't remember where he was from)-centric thing?

Some would argue that you can have fun climbing whatever grade, but that the best climber is the one who, well, climbs the best. I doubt many club golfers argue that they are better than Tiger Woods because they enjoy it lots, but yet with climbing it seems deeply fashionable to profess your superioriy above climbers who climb far better than you because of some nice soundbite which implies that you are somehow enjoying it more than they are.

I have great fun climbing. I really enjoy it. But I wouldn't profess that that could ever make me "the best climber" simply because I was having fun, I accept that I'm a crap climber who enjoys it, the same as I do with most other sports. I don't know why this feeling of insecurity about your own climbing arises which manifests itself in this desire to be "the best" through turning the conventional meaning of "best" on its head.

I'd be really interested to find out:
a)What grades veterans climb in major competitions anyway, since this seems to be a serious bone of contention. I suspect that veterans in fact climb a lot harder than most of us think and woud be able to make a perfectly respectable showing on the ladder even if they unsurprisingly weren't likely to win it outright
b) What thw grade spread in similar competitions organised abroad is. I have a sneaking suspicion that it won't be any lower....

AJM

In reply to Simon Lee:
Why didn't they change it then?

I could understand if they actually _want_ it to be a bit excluding, because otherwise they'll get too many entries and it'll be unmanageable... but then the best idea would be to say so, instead of pretending it's for everyone.

And I do seriously think they should've done something about the age categories. Maybe even now they could tweak that? Though by setting it at 6b up, I expect they've excluded rather a lot of the oldest climbers.

Personally I find guys of 75 who climb 6a a heck of a sight more impressive than 25 year olds climbing 7a.... be nice if they were celebrated.

I'll shut up now.

In reply to gingerkate:

In reply to gingerkate:

I am not sure what has got your back up (or Micks) but in case anyone is as confused as I am I should point out I have nothing at all to do with the BMC or any vested interest except as a potential participant.

The Leading Ladder is in my view 95% a good thing which makes it 95% better than the 0% of last year when it didnt exist.

If it is 100% a good thing next year so much the better.

In reply to Tony Strutt:

The motivation for going around the country to climb at whatever grade you enjoy (severe in your example) is a totally different motivation to competing (which is what this thread is about). What is the point of entering any competition if you aren't going to try to be competitive ?

In reply to Papillon: How will entering a competition you have no chance of winning motivate you?



Ask the 30,000 runners in the London Marathon

In reply to AJM:

My local wall has categories for vets, super vets, and super super vets in their comps. And the latter two of those three are usually won by my mates

(I'm proud of my mates)
(I doubt they'll be entering this comp, as the 6b start will put them off.)

In reply to Tony Strutt:
>"the best climber is th one who's having the most fun"

Tell us how you measure who's having the most fun, and please be sure to make the entry level low enough for me

In reply to Simon Lee:

Telling us to be quiet like good little children is what annoyed me.

But if that's not an officially sanctioned BMC attitude you (and they) are forgiven

In reply to AJM:

So one now has to climb indoors to be the best? Oh well I won't be troubling the scorers then I'll stay outside and ignore the whole nonsense.

To continue your golf analogy, a bit like me beating Tiger Woods on the PS2 game and claiming to be the best.

In reply to Simon Lee: Snappy reply, but I'm sure you're bright enough to see how the comparission crumbles under inspection.

In reply to Papillon:

Participation is fun, will get you fit, you can compete against your mates, or just set yourself challanges.....

In reply to Papillon: Snappy reply, but I'm sure you're bright enough to see how the comparission crumbles under inspection



I'm not bright enough so you will have to explain it for me.

In reply to GrahamD: ""the best climber is the one who's having the most fun" ...is the most trite bollox I've seen on this forum"

you obviously haven't been on this forum for more than a day then. and you obviously don't get what climbing is about, either.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

You can do all that...and most do, without entering this ladder. Indoor climbing is inclusive, it's one of the few sporting venues where kids top roping 3's rub shoulders with rock (or plastic) athletes doing 8's.

In reply to Papillon:
Comps are great fun. You don't have to win a comp for it to be fun. They make you push harder ... ask anyone who has run in a race ... you run faster when you're competing. Same goes for climbing. You push harder, you grit your teeth and hang on to the hold you thought you couldn't. It just adds a bit of zest.

In reply to gingerkate:

So complaining about something which is for the most part a good thing is acceptable ?

I imagine that this is the type of thing that really grinds down people trying to do something new and different. You could be forgiven for ending up not bothering in the first place.

In reply to Papillon:

But as my experience and observations tell me, if you have goal, like a bouldering or leading ladder, it increases the frequency of climbing on a personal level.

I tagged the Too Elite? on the news piece after talking to some people who said just that.

One was a climber who has climbed 7's but hasn't for several years. He would have liked to join in the BMC Leading Ladder but the starting grade was too high. He would have preferred a handful of lower graded routes.

Anyway his local wall, is going to do their own leading ladder, in addition to the BMC one, with lower grade routes.

In reply to Horse:

I have to say I have absolutely no idea what tone of voice to attach to your post. I have a sneaking suspicion its sarcasm, but then since I agree completely with your second sentence (and like the analogy - indoor can be a laugh, but its not really the same) I'm not sure why.

I am always puzzled by the fact that some people seem to equate enjoyment and skill. I just see them as completely different things.

I, and most other people who climb that I know, enjoy travelling all over the place climbing great routes which appeal to us. Theres not a single one of us who doesn't think that he/she is crap though. If someone who climbed at the fairly moderate level I climb at told me that they considered themselves to be good, or worse still "the best" I'd be fairly stumped for a reply really. Are there circles of people out there who do exactly the same thing on exactly the same routes as us, but think that they are the best climbers in the world at the same time?

AJM

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:How is F6b elitist? It's a competition ffs!! If you're not good enough to compete then train till you are, or go outside and have fun, and ignore grades like the rest of us.
Sam

In reply to Simon Lee:



Absolute rubbish again Simon. I think you will find that the BMC Officers are robust and welcome criticism and questions.

You do them a diservice by thinking otherwise.

Please remember, the BMC work for us, the climbers. We pay them.

In reply to Simon Lee:




I'm not that arsed about it to get drawn into a discussion with yourself and Mick, I just don't see what Mick is getting worked up about. If you and Mick think a lower entry is required, and you really believe is is comparable with the marathon, then good luck with your cause.

A splendid solution!

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


Criticism can be made positively and negatively.

IMO it was negative to launch your criticism provocatively, publicly and late in the day.

In reply to Simon Lee:

Yep. That's how women got the vote, doncha know?

In reply to gingerkate: That's how women got the vote


Good grief ! when did that happen ?

In reply to GrahamD:

well you prove my point. This is only a competition for those that take competitions seriously! It's not for fun at all!
It is not an inclusive competition that is open for the average climber - I would be surprised if the average grade for the majority was above 6b / 6c

In reply to gingerkate: Are you serious? How was women not having the vote 'for the most part a good thing'??? I assume you are joking...?
Sam

In reply to gingerkate:


so your saying that women not having the vote is for the most part a good thing then?

In reply to Papillon: And not an uncommon one. A tiny bouldering wall near me - Cliffs Barn, Mawdesley, regularly holds competitions at all grades. If you get good enough after a few of these there is quite obvious progression to bigger regional comps etc. If competitivity floats your boat then this is how it works, and similarly in all other sports as far as I'm concerned.

If you could walk straight into a national comp and have a go there'd be no real desire to try that hard. The desire comes after a huge amount of effort.

In reply to rginns:

No, but its certainly attainable for almost anyone.

In reply to Papillon:


Same way you get motivated to lead that HVS (or whatever) you've always had your eye on. Surely the majority of climbers compete chiefly against themselves and their own (perceived) limitations. The rock/plastic doesn't give a rat's ass if you fall off, and for 99.9% of us the question of whether we are 'the best' is irrelevant. I'd imagine that for the other 0.1% that question is also often irrelevant - you don't see the Daves for eg mouthing off about how they are better than each other or whatever.

A competition-style league (or whatever) which encourages people to push themselves, get involved in a scene and have a laugh sounds like a good idea to me. Try telling me that someone who puts a bit of effort in and ticks F6b F6c and F7a by the end of their ladder, having started the sequence at F6a/b is having a worse time and is less motivated than someone who bags each F8a route!

Plus the 3 walls only format lets the REAL competition, i.e. between you and your mates for bragging rights down the pub, potentially blossom. I sat in on a national comp once to support a rather talented young chap and was blown away by the quality and commitment on show (eg Adam Dewhurst just hanging a halfway crux and nearly slapping his way all the way to the top, face beetroot and steam train impression derigeur), but would have loved a parallel bumbly comp (eg F6s and below only allowed) to have the chance to join in, become an active part of the scene and hopefully (though not likely) hand out an ass-whooping to my mates!

Re Elitism - whether the charge is relevant depends on the stated purpose of the ladder. If the purpose is to encourage individuals regardless of ability and foster an inclusive social scene, then maybe starting at F6b means the BMC missed a trick. If it is to help boost (top-end) competition climbing in Britain then maybe they've started too low! If the BMC were trying to achieve both aims, and maybe others too, then maybe they're not too far off and in a compromise, inevitably not everyone is satisfied?

One format that works well with bouldering is to set a range of graded problems and assign points for completion/completion style as well as just grades. A bit of strategy comes in then too as you balance your likelihood of a flash with the difficulty of a problem to maximise your score. Running that in combo with an overall difficulty score lets you create 'meaningful' competition across ability levels.

In reply to Sam L:
It spoils it when you have to explain it! You're supposed to dot the i and t yourself. But here you go:
The ordinary population being allowed to vote was a good thing. (ie better than dictatorship, rule by the aristocracy etc etc etc). But not as good as universal suffrage. So, in order to get teh vote, women complained.

In reply to Simon Lee:


Originally it was not my criticism. I voiced it and added some op-ed to it.

You bet I voiced it publicly and provocatively (apart from the obvious attention it garners it also gives Simon Lee something to vent about).

But I do tend to agree. I like a reason for going down the wall in the winter, this would have been a great reason.

Maybe the BMC can tag on some F5's and easy F6's to make it more inclusive OR the walls themselves can add easier routes. At least one is so far.

Mick

In reply to Simon Lee:
:-D

In reply to match:

Excellent post - if I could vote for it - you would get 5 stars

In reply to match: You could easily have a mock competition with your mates using several routes at your local wall and the same scoring system. Why does the BMC have to do it for you?

In reply to Calder: Why does the BMC have to do it for you?



Im sure you could map out a 26 mile route from your front door but its not the same as the London Marathon

In reply to Simon Lee:
LOL, nice one.

In reply to AJM:

Not sure there was any tone, oh all right may be a hint of sarcasm.

I am inclined to agree on the enjoyment/skill thing, one doesn't necessarily follow from the other. Where I do have a bit of concern is the notion that if you are not competing and not very good you can't enjoy something. I see this with one of my boys and some of his mates. It is quite inhibiting.

In reply to Simon Lee: I know, but Match said he'd like a "bumbly" competition to hand out an ass-whooping to his mates. What's the point in the BMC organising a comp for people to have bragging rights with mates?

This proves why 6b is a good entry level, its low enough that anyone who puts in the effort can compete, and that after they have put in that effort they will care about it enough for it to be more than a lark with the lads.

In reply to Simon Lee: Just like, if you want a 26 mile race just to see whether you are better than your mates it doesn't necessarily have to be the London Marathon.

In reply to Simon Lee: In this maraton analogy you seem to be sticking with, where is your 'finishing line' for the indoor climbing?

In reply to Horse:

My opinion on enjoyment/skill:

Skilled people will enjoy it. Anyone who thinks that Sharma, McClure etc don't enjoy what they are doing is deluding themselves, theres no way you could evote that much time to somehting you hate, it doesn't even have the financial compensation of selling your soul to the city to make it work

But, as you say, the non-skilled can and should enjoy it just as much if they want to. Enjoyment is after all in the eye of the beholder, noone else should be able to convince you you aren't enjoying something. I'd really hate to be in a situation whereby I was made to feel crap for not climbing as well as someone else, a bit of healthy banter is one thing and can often spur you on a bit but I don't enjoy climbing with people who are overly competitive in that way, because it can quickly pass beyond a bit of banter and start to piss you off.

AJM

In reply to Calder: What's the point in the BMC organising a comp for people to have bragging rights with mates?


A few reasons. One compelling one is that it raises the profile of indoor climbing to engage a larger number of climbers in indoor climbing and competitions through personal participation which would be a missed opportunity if the grades are too high.

Comp climbing does not currently have a great significance for the climbing public. If there was an event were everyone participated themselves rubbing shoulders as it were with the best comp climbers it might be a catalyst to change opinion and raise awareness of comp climbing in general.

In reply to Simon Lee:

*Blushes* It's moments like that which make it all worthwhile

In reply to Calder:

Please don't think I am sat here thinking "Ah, good, more unearned benefits laid on for me. The world is still working properly." The BMC certainly does not have to do it all for me. Responding at a personal level, I have helped organised semi-formal competitions, set routes etc for club level comps, and would like to think that I (and indeed most people) have sufficient imagination to enliven their own indoor sessions with a bit of informal competition if so desired.

The point I was aiming towards when saying how much I would have enjoyed a parallel bumbly's comp, and supporting the idea of the leading ladder, was that such a competition scene would be more encouraging and inspiring for a greater number of people (myself included). Assuming that the goal of indoor climbing and competition is not just to crown a champion but to have fun and push yourself, I think that this BMC initiative is a good thing, not just for me but for a wide variety of people, for the BMC and also for genuine elite competition climbing. By offering a 19 year old lad climbing F6b the chance to 'mix it' with the best in a more active way, you hopefully encourage the F8c climber of the future who enjoys and stays with comps.

In reply to Papillon: In this maraton analogy you seem to be sticking with, where is your 'finishing line' for the indoor climbing?


You started it. Like with marathons you can only push yourself and analogies so far.

(But as you mention it - when you hand your scorecard in)

In reply to Simon Lee:


Fair point - but totally different to why I was questioning Match's answer.

But maybe this is where wall owners need to step in. Local comps can also be a catalyst to change opinion and raise awareness of comp climbing. Those who take it seriously enough will be ensure they improve to standards that enable them to enter the national comps - this is how all sports function as far as I'm aware. The BMC has to draw a line somewhere - if not 6b then where? 5+? 5? 4?

In reply to Calder: - if not 6b then where? 5+? 5? 4?


Speaking personally, and as long as they werent reachy, then 4 would be perfect. That way I could do it with my sons and wife as a family outing.

From a commercial point of view I can only see it as beneficial for Climbing Wall managers to include lower grades.

In reply to Calder:

I should add: the ass-whooping comment was the third in a list of possible reasons why I would enjoy it, and by far the least important of the three. I'm not generally a competitive person.

Anyone who desires a national competition solely so he/she can rub a mate's nose in the dust is a little odd in my opinion; I'm sorry it came across that way.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

It would be difficult to include the entire grade range and keep the number of routes that you have to climb sensible. If this year is judged a success, perhaps a second/overlapping tier should be introduced with more routes at f5-f6.

There seem to be a lot of negative comments, so I hope the people behind this aren't too disheartened. I'd like to say well done to all involved. It's a great idea and must have taken a lot of effort to get it off the ground. I've never considered doing any form of leading comp before because the whole concept of isolation etc. doesn't sound fun. I'm looking forward to getting involved at this down at my local wall with friends and venturing further afield to complete 3 cards. It might just give me the motivation I need to keep doing routes and stay fit through the winter months instead of just going bouldering.

In reply to Tony Strutt:



Several years, in fact.

Look - don't get me wrong - for me having fun is a large part of what climbing is about but I'm not daft enough to think I'm a good climber simply because I've got an inane grin on my face.

The person having the most fun is the person having the most fun and the best climber is the one that is climbing the best.

In reply to petesdavies:

>It would be difficult to include the entire grade range and keep the number of routes that you have to climb sensible.

This neednt be the case if you only had to submit say your 6 best routes/scores.

>There seem to be a lot of negative comments, so I hope the people behind this aren't too disheartened

I hope so too.

In reply to Mick Ryan and others:I was going to do be diplomatic but:

This is a NATIONAL competition. It's not a local, fun, competition for beginners or recreational climbers. It's aimed at individuals who have a serous interest in indoor lead climbing AS A SPORT IN ITS OWN RIGHT and would like an objective standard by which to measure their ability both in absolute and relative terms.

As such, having the majoirtiy of the routes in the grade 7s is perfectly reasonble. In fact my initial thought was that the grade range from 6b to 8a in 6 steps whilst logical was perhaps on the wide side and that an extra route(s) in the range middle range of 6c to 7b would be more useful than either extreme of 6b or 8a.

Quite frankly if anyone considers climbing 6b indoors is hard then they are not taking indoor climbing seriously as a SPORT. There is nothing wrong with viewing indoor climbing as 'recretion', 'fitness training', 'fun', 'practive for outdoors' or 'something to do if it's raining outside' but if anyone genuinely embraces it as sporting endevour requiring effort and commitment (i.e. consistently climbing on lead hard enough to fall-off) they will end up climbing 6b easily.

Using the well-worn running analogy, this is not a 'a 10km fun run' where the aim is just to get round the course this is more like a '10km track race' where the aim is to post a PB under race conditions.

Kate, IMO, your arguement about age is spurious and I think that in climbing as with fell runing the older competitors whether in their 40's, 50's or 60's will give the teenagers and 20-somethings a run for their money. The proposed (single) age limit seems sensible and the only alternative of having veterens, super-veterens, very-super-veterens, hard-very-super-veterns, mild-extremley-veterens etc. covering ever finer age brackets quickly turns into a farce.

Indoor boulder comps (eg. SIBL) I believe have contriubted to the rise in standards of bouldering by providing many indoor climbers with a focus for their training and their climbing year. If this ladder can get more climbers pushing themselves to the limit on indoor routes then it only bodes well for British climbing as a whole.

I've been entering leading competitions both here and abroad for 6 years now and 'edge' the competiitons give to my climbing has been invaluable in getting me to understand my limits. I'll be entering the ladder and I'll be encouraging anyone else interested in improving their route climbing (indoors, sport or trad) to participate as well.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

What I find elitist is the idea of having a winner at all. Surely in this day and age either the winner should be randomly drawn from among the competitors, or else, as the Red Queen would have it, everyone must have prizes.

In fact when you think of it the very idea of succeeding or failing on a route is repellent. Surely it would be better if all competitors were allowed simply to tick every route, in order to ensure fairness?

jcm

In reply to Mark Stevenson: This is a NATIONAL competition. It's not a local, fun, competition for beginners or recreational climbers


Given that the the Leading Ladder is self-marked has an unusual informal slant for a National competition - unless of course you get through to the finals.

This allows it to have the potential to be both a FUN and a SERIOUS event as well.

Mark, if you concentrate hard enough you can hold two different thoughts in your head at the same time

In reply to Calder:

ah, but that's different - potential attanability is not a reflection of average performance, which is my point.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

I doubt many taking part consider indoor climbing as a sport in its own right!

Hopefully it will work like the bouldering leagues - fun and a means of staying motivated through the winter.

Perhaps they should have started at F6a? But then some F6bs feel like F6a (e.g. the red route on the left of the Foundry main wall ) and vice versa.

If you aren't climbing F6a indoors you probably don't climb regularly enough to care about a competition anyway?

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

Not so according to the BMC website. Whilst it is a national leading ladder.

"The BMC Leading Ladder is a new, fun competition. Taking part is an excellent way to improve your climbing standards. It's also a great way to get fit - and stay fit - over the winter months."

http://www.thebmc.co.uk/ladder

As Simon says, it has the potential to be both, serious and fun. Both for those who are keen to compete and those who what to particiupate for the fun element.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Will you be giving away tricky sequences?

In reply to rginns: Yes, and my point is that if you really really wanted to compete with the best in the country you could put in the effort and do so. So it is attainable for anyone. The fact it is not immediately attainable does not make it exclusive, and it doesn't surprise me at all that people are up in arms about something they can't have on a plate.

Those who are interested in the fun side are unlikely to travel to three walls to complete a card, so I suggest the individual walls cater for the sub 6b end of the spectrum.

In reply to Tom, UKC News Editor:

I thought all the legs were being streamed live at the BMC website.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I might be being an idiot but can someone explain how a 'leading ladder' works? They've never had them at my wall so I don't know anything about them. I've read the bit on the BMC website about how it works but I'm still confused.

Cheers.

In reply to climbingpixie:
>> They've never had them at my wall

It's only running at specific walls. I's suspect part of the challenge is to (a) win a game of "hunt the wall" in an industrial estate in the middle of nowhere (b) arrive keen and motivated after spending the last three hours sitting cramped in one position, doing 20mph on the motorway and staring at the back of the lorry in front and (c) having gone through all the aggro of travelling to Sheffield/Leeds/Bristol/any other wall that's a lot closer to real rock than home is, resist the temptation to look at the sunshine and go "bugger this, see you at Stanage".

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Now you're just being stupid. A more sensible idea would be a handicap system where everyone competes on the same route but better climbers have to wear weighted vests, the weight added increasing relative to their best grades.
This includes climbers who are better because they have more fun, this would be evaluated using an 'abscence of misery-ometer' (patent pending).

In reply to Wingnut: "bugger this, see you at Stanage".

This option is far less attractive on dark, rainy weekday evenings.

In reply to Simon Lee:
So, unfortunately, is the three-hour-each-way drive to anywhere that's running the comp.

In reply to Serpico: There's no such thing as failure on a route - just deferred success.

In reply to Serpico: but better climbers have to wear weighted vests, the weight added increasing relative to their best grades.

All the holds would snap if John Dunne entered.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
let's be honest, if you care enough about climbing to be going to comps then you're almost certainly going to be climbing 6b. if you just haven't reached that level cos you're new to the sport but you're really psyched to improve then it could act as a nice aim to get good enough to compete for next year.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Speaking as someone who is concerned about and is often a defender of the less elite I can't really see what the fuss is about in this case. For someone focussing on the sports climbing game, working F6b isn't that hard and a bigger range could have proved a flop in setting a sensible challenge for the main target range of aspirants. Its been set up so lets see how it goes: if its very popular think about expansion next year.

Fun ranges can be counter-productive to improvement... watch places like Nottingham with improving climbers regularly ticking off 200/200 in the bouldering fun and intermediate leagues when they should have immediately moved on to the better challenge of the next level. Winning a lower league than you should be in (with the glory and prizes attached) can be very tempting.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

Yes, but in fell running you get exactly the sort of divisions into vets, super-vets, etc, which you proceed to deride in your next sentence. And while those in their 40s and even 50s sometimes out perform 20-somethings, those in their 60s and 70s don't.

In reply to Tom, UKC News Editor:
Want to bet ....what odds ?

There are many who would not dream of climbing outdoors...
too cold, wet and windy and no colored holds or fixed abseil stations with ropes in situ...

Obviously you did not read the guardian adventure supplement which matches wall climbing with sea kayaking .....

everyone should get out more... I know i must...

In reply to Mark Stevenson: Indoor climbing isn't a sport, its simply a way of traing for a sport like running on a treadmill or using a rowing machine.

If you view this as a national competition rather than a fun event 6b is far too low. rather than addig something in the range of 6c-7b (still well in the 'punter range') there should be more in the 8a-c range and nothing below 7b. However, this obviously isn't a serious event, theyve already got one for very strong people, its a fun event and really they should add some lower grade climbs and maybe some top ropes for a laugh.

In reply to JoeL 90:

I wonder how many miles the winner will have driven over the winter months? It strikes me that it will be more your willingness (and finances) to drive to Sunderland and Swansea on a cold, wet, weekend that dictates the winner, rather than pure ability.

I certainly couldn't afford to enter.

In reply to hutchm: I personally would rather travel in search of winter conditions rather than going to different large sheds in industrial estates.

I think the competition will produce weird results because Britains best are unlikely to enter at least in the adult category and so the winner will come from some sort of second tier of british climbers.

Anyway it sounds like a bit of fun so i may go to the one in leeds as i go there anyway. Id certainly be intrested to see how many miles the winner will have clocked up travelling to different venues.

In reply to Tom, UKC News Editor:

I thought that too until I started working at one. There are a lot of people who have no intention of getting outside, or just prefer inside. These are the people who are there all day on sunny Saturdays. Happily though, they are all in one place, and not out on the crag....!
Sam

In reply to Simon Lee:

And why should it? Why would we want to change opinion? Personally, I've never gone a bundle on comp climbing (and I speak as someone who helped extensively with the BRYCS competitions for several years).

Many of the "climbing public" that I know got into climbing precisely because it *wasn't* a highly-organised "sport" with lots of arcane rules (though the arcane "ethics" underlying it are something else!). Many of us hated team games and were relieved to find a physical activity that was loosely (even barely) organised and codified, and where they competition that went on was either in your own head or only relevant as far as a relatively tight "peer group" was concerned.

Why would we now want to see comp climbing become of "greater significance"? All it will do is to bring more restriction/ codification into our chosen activity.

I appreciate that walls have to generate revenue, and it I want a good local wall to train on in winter then an element of this sort of thing is something that I might have to put up with in order for a wall to remain profitable. I can also appreciate watching someone like Sandrine Levet execute a series of hard gymnastic moves, but I don't actually care if she wins...I just enjoy seeing how she moves

In reply to Rob Naylor: Why is the BMC which purportedly represents, climbers hill walkers and mountaineers spending time, effort and probably money on such a purile willy waving activity?

How many people are likely to take part? Not many and they'd probably be the same people that would pay to enter things like the SIBL or other climbing comps.

The association of the BMC with this type of competition is a seriously retrograde step.

Oh, I've no problem with elitism, elitism is a good thing the problem is that this 'ladder' has nothing to do with hill walking, mountaineering or climbing.

In reply to Rob Naylor:

Good points.

Firstly I was answering the question - 'why would the BMC...' and looking at it from their (the BMC's) point of view rather than speaking from personal preference. My son enjoys the BRYCS immensely but personally I find spectating this or any sport tedious but given that spectating sport is such a large industry I assume I am in the minority.

If you look at climbing as a collection of 'related' sports with differnt 'rules' rather than as something more homogenous and unified then it can be only a good thing to sample as many of the different variations of climbing as possible to discover which aspects appeals most to yourself. That includes comp climbing.

The Leading Ladder allows a larger number of people to sample this variant - even more if the enrty level grade is reduced. How can this be anything but a good thing ?. If you and your 'uncodified' mates sample it and reject it at least you have done so from personal experience rather than from assumptions and prejudice.

I am surprised that the 'unorganised' element of the Leading Ladder doesnt appeal to you given your stated inclinations - I know it appeals to me and I would also class myself as not especially 'teamy'. As for your obsession with Sandrine Levet - I couldn't possibly comment.

In reply to Anonymous:

>Why is the BMC which purportedly represents, climbers hill walkers and mountaineers spending time, effort and probably money...

Because climbers will participate

>on such a purile willy waving activity?

In your opinion (its puerile by the way)

>How many people are likely to take part? Not many and they'd probably be the same people that would pay to enter things like the SIBL or other climbing comps.

Its a pilot scheme and its continuation next year will hinge on its popularity

>The association of the BMC with this type of competition is a seriously retrograde step.

In your opinion again - I see it as forward looking and the first time I have ever thought wow the BMC is doing something positive that I might join in on

>Oh, I've no problem with elitism, elitism is a good thing

Now THAT is retrograde

>has nothing to do with hill walking, mountaineering or climbing.

I agree it has nothing to do with the first two activities


(BTW does anyone have a link to a BMC statement setting out its goals and objectives as I couldnt immediately find one on their website)

In reply to Simon Lee:

Its not a requirement to be able to climb 6b - people can enter regardless, and they might surprise themselves and get a few points for working it. This, however, seems to be unappealing to you all because of the possibilty of nil points and the fact you might have to put in some effort.

Competitions are not meant to be easy and should require effort and determination.

In reply to JoeL 90:

I'm afraid that I utterly disagree about your view of indoor climbing not being a sport. As will the BMC, as will Sport England, and as will the IOC who have been offically asked to consider it as a future Olympic disipline. It is clearly a sport with a number of clearly defined disciplines and an internationally recognised governing body and competition programme. It is highly developed one with a large following, albeit much more so abroad rather than the UK.

You view is as spurious as trying to argue that track athletics or indoor cycling are not sports as they are only training for fell-running or mountain biking.

Secondly, I think you are being rather optimistic with regards to the grades you expect people to climb given this is a 'ground-up' competition. The ability to regularly onsight 7b is certainly not 'punter' territory and the jump in ability required to onsight 7c/8a is pretty big. I certainly look forward with interest to seeing how the competition pans out this year. I'll be surprised if there are perfect scores from many people who haven't previously competed in the BICCs and/or BRYCS.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

Nor is the ability to onsight 5+.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

It's certainly bordering on punter territory....

In reply to Calder: Its not a requirement to be able to climb 6b ....Competitions are not meant to be easy and should require effort and determination.


Effort and determination are entirely relative to ability.

For example a 12 year old new to the sport might put in the same effort and determination into climbing a 5+ that I might put into climbing a 7b. By having the starting grade set at 6b denies the 12 year old the opportunity.

In reply to Simon Lee: Yes, ok. The younger age group is a special exception and I have no doubt the BMC will learn about any problems such as this. .

I was referring more to the adult age groups where 5 or 5+ is clearly not challenging enough to base a competition on. I think most regular wall-goers would be able to cleanly lead it after a couple of tries.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:

A better analogy would be between running on a treadmill and running on a track...

In reply to Calder:

The six routes are graded F6b, F6c, F7a, F7b, F7c and F8a

OK, if I were a F6c adult leader (average regular wall goer redpoint level?) I might think "Whats the point in partipating - I can only get up two routes".

If lower graded routes wre additionally on offer for our 6c climber it would represent beter value for the £1 entry and conveniently provide warm-up routes.

In reply to Simon Lee:

In reply to Simon Lee: Thats bollcks. If you climb F6c and your attitude to the competition is I can only climb two routes you need your head examining. You should be able to confidently attempt 2 routes, then considering its a competition push yourself some and attempt maybe two harder than that. With a bit of effort and determination you never know what you can achieve. As I said earlier its not meant to be easy.

If the competition was as some people suggest - with F4, F5 etc and we all walked in climbed what we were comfortable at and left it at that it would be a totally boring and pointless competition. Its only fun and rewarding if you have to put in a shed load of effort, then when you actually succeed - even if it is by completing just the one 6b route - you will feel like you've achieved something.

In reply to Calder: In reply to Calder:


I fail to see how a climber at 6c redpoint level can climb two grades harder with a bit of effort and determination. By definition 6c would represent your current limit. Thats not the same as saying that you shouldnt try to push your grade.

>with F4, F5 etc and we all walked in climbed what we were comfortable at and left it at that it would be a totally boring and pointless competition

What we are comfortable with or challenged by is related to our ability. If you are comfort-zoning in a competition you are not achieving your potential. I don't think we are disagreeing here.

In reply to Simon Lee:

To me they had to draw the line somewhere and it happened to be F6b. As I said re: the kids routes thing, the BMC are not idiots and if it doesn't work out using that as the lower limit they'll change it for next time.

I'm just of the opinion that its the effort put in that determines how rewarding it is. And if you really really wanted to enter then even your average joe - like me - could put in the effort and maybe achieve something they were proud of - ie. redpointing a 6b when they current only toprope the odd 6a or 6a+ say. Its something that the people who care about entering competitions can aspire and work towards, and even those not bothered can have a bash anyway for a bit of fun - even if they get 0 points at the end of it.

There just doesn't seem to be any point in having that lower boundary at a level most people can walk up to and climb straight off - that would not inspire, nor would it encourage people to improve.

In reply to Calder: even your average joe - like me - could put in the effort and maybe achieve something they were proud of - ie. redpointing a 6b when they current only toprope the odd 6a or 6a+ say.


By the same token can't you see that for someone else putting in the effort to achieve soemthing they were proud of - ie redpointing a 6a+ when they currently only toprope the odd 5 or 5+ say is no lesser achievement.

In reply to Simon Lee:

how much value do you want for £1???!

In reply to Simon Lee:

No its not a lesser achievement, and I didn't suggest that. What they can do though is make sure they're good enough for when next years comp comes round. If they care they'll put in the effort - and thats them interested and inspired for a whole year, and it'll be even more rewarding next year when they succeed at one of the routes next year.

Long term goals are very important for maintaining motivation and interest, remember this is one of the aims of the competition so maybe they picked 6b with this in mind.

I've said it once already but not everyone can have everything immediately. That some people will have to work hard to be able to successfully participate next year is no bad thing in my opinion, and will at least ensure there are going to be some people fired up for it if the BMC organises another one - which I hope they do.

In the meantime there's nothing to prevent them at least trying it...

In reply to Ian Hill:

In reply to Ian Hill: how much value do you want for £1???!

Its not as if these routes are off-limits to those who dont pay for the card/entry. So for a 6a climber paying £1 for climbing one 6b route that he/she'd probably fail on could be poor value for money especially as there is nothing stopping them from trying it without paying anyway.

Howabout if the crux move is at the start? - that's £1 for failing on one move repeatedly. Never underestimate the stinginess of climbers.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: interesting thread. firstly, congratulations to the BMC for organising this - i am unaware of anything at this level happening nationally before; as someone mentions, there are people out there who want an 'objective' insight into their climbing (for most i doubt this is about being to say "im better", rather its about competing against yourself).

for a competition of this nature the grade spread seems about right: much more than 8a and youre talking a different league (ie existing competition climbers and theyre catered for). as for 6b being too elitist, a bit of perspective here: its a national competition and like it or not 6b, in the greater scheme of things, isnt exactly cutting edge.

In reply to ksjs: and like it or not 6b, in the greater scheme of things, isnt exactly cutting edge


If you had read the thread you wouldnt find anyone disagreeing with you.

The point is that the Leading Ladder is being sold as an event for all to participate in, not just the elite, which is why the 6b entry garade is too high.

In reply to Simon Lee: The BMC climbing wall & competitions officers have been BOTH quiet, it would be nice if they would respond to some of the questuions assuming people have not approached the BMC direct and had heard thier views? Rob Adie has used this forum before to let everyone know of his arrival as bmc walls officer this year!

let's make the ladder available to everyone and stick in a Stannah stairlift. Just think how much money these wall owners can make then.

In reply to Simon Lee: i did read the post and got the impression that 6b was considered objectively difficult by some. it isnt; 6b (indoors) is a grade that the majority of climbers, with a degree of ongoing commitment and focus, could reasonably expect to climb. 6b is not therefore elitist.

In reply to ksjs:

Your line of reasoning is flawed.

6b is objectively difficult if you climb 6a.

I agree 6b is a level that virtually everyone could climb with the right application - but the fact is not everyone is at that level yet or ever will be.

If you can stop being fixated with Mick's attention-grabbing headline for one second and read the rest of his article and the thread you might agree that 6b as a starting grade certainly couldn't be categorised as inclusive.

In reply to ksjs:

'considered by some' is a subjective judgement not an objective one. All judgements of difficulty are subjective Even a 9a+ route will be considered as relatively easy by someone climbing 9c, when that eventually happens.


A quick look round a busy wall at which routes have queues and which do not suggests that the majority of climbers expect to climb no more than about 5+ or maybe 6a.

In reply to Simon Lee: And you're obsessed with it being available to all right away now please make it a bit easier because I can't quite do it.

FACT: 6b is not an entry requirement - anyone can TRY.

FACT: With effort & commitment most - and you have admitted this yourself - will be able to climb 6b, even if it is not in time for this years competition, so it is not elitist. Hopefully the BMC will run this next year and this gives said climber motivation throughout the year.

If you read the BMC press releases the first one states the competition is for "those who may want to use the BMC Leading Ladder as a way of getting fit for major competitions or to push themselves and improve their climbing standards generally" (http://www.thebmc.co.uk/News.aspx?id=1994). But then in a more recent one (http://www.thebmc.co.uk/Feature.aspx?id=2076) they tagged in the word fun so people didn't think it was just for those in the above category - and because it may well be. It has never been said its a competition for all, just that anyone can have a go.

So if you can stop being fixated with Mick's attention-grabbing headline for one second and read the BMC articles properly you might see that the BMC never intended the competition to include grades so low that my gran could climb them without using feet.

In reply to Simon Lee: my last post on this as we're going round in circles but when i say 'objectively difficult' i use it in the sense of what 6b represents within the entire spectrum of climbing difficulty. surely your meaning is subjective? 6b is inclusive.

In reply to Simon Lee: Thanks for pointing out my typing error, I'm so glad you took the time out of what must have been a busy day defending the indefensible.

If the BMC wants to run climbing competitions, so be it; but to try and dress this idiotic proposal up in the way that it has is just pathetic.

My personal, cynical view is that this is just an exercise in a 'nonjob' justifying their position by creating initiatives and demonstrating that their job is so onerus that they need an assistant.

In reply to Anonymous:

Whilst clearly you are emboldened by your anonymity would you be bold enough to accuse Rab Carrington of being a 'nonjob' to his face - I very much doubt it.

In reply to Simon Lee: I believe it's The Poster Formerly Known As Sloper.

In reply to Papillon:

I doubt it - if it had been Sloper the spelling would have been better and he would have called me a moron.

Firstly I'm glad you only have to go to 3 dates to get a shot at the grand final! That was a good plan. Secondly I think there people are being a bit silly about all of this. F6b is frankly quite easy "in the grand scheme" as it has already been said. It is an inclusive grade because anyone can try it. If you went into a tennis tournament and you were crap, you would lose. Therefore you can enter this comp and if you are crap (can't climb 6b) you will lose. My limit is probably about 7a+/7B which isn't bad but there is no way i'll be climbing a 7c or 8a (making me, in the grand schemem of things, crap). But i'll still be attending with bells on and trying my best to lead everything! 8a's included for comedy value and to give me an idea of how crap I am.

In reply to Simon Lee:
This thread reminds me increasingly of that sketch with Cleese and Barker and Corbett where they all stand there in a line saying, "I am upper class, I look down on him ..." etc

:-D

In reply to gingerkate: You might find the line in this case is a little befuddled.

Simon Lee for example appears to be capapble of a respectable performance in this competition - he is saying the lowest grade is too high.

I am not currently capable of leading 6b and would contest the lowest grade routes for the competition are about right to instill motivation and interest.

etc...

In reply to Simon Lee:

6b isn't exactly pushing it so anyone can join in. The point is to TRY these routes, no-one mentioned doing them all. As long as people are getting satisfaction out of pushing themselves a bit then what's the harm in setting the standard at a decent level.

And no, I won't be entering, I'm too old for this kind of malarky.

Andy F

In reply to Calder:
I think Simon Lee is making perfect sense. It's everyone else! It's all these flaming 6b climbers who're happily looking down on the 5+ climbers and calling them punters. If 5+ is punterdom, so is 6b. And 6c. And even 7a. It makes zero sense for ordinary climbers to go on some sort of delusional snoot-trip, looking down at them what's below them. There's few posting here who are seriously good, we're all just loving it for it's own sake, and trying to get better, and that's as true for the 5+ climber aspiring to lead their first 6a, as it is for the 6c+ climber aspiring to lead their first 7a.

In reply to Simon Caldwell:


Perhaps the majority of climbers expectations of themselves/their ability is far too low and many are capable of more than they think?

In reply to gingerkate:



I'm not really sure it is. Anyone (and I mean pretty much anyone) who takes a even a remote interest in climbing (say wall once a week, not actually standing around talking all evening) will progress to 6a without actually having to try hard - its still very much the realms of a recreational climber. 6C+ to 7a actually takes effort and a level of determination to achieve.

6b is a good cut off IMO as it does require just a bit of dedication from a recreational climber to achieve. There is no point in having a competition without it requiring some effort other than to go to the wall once a week, have a laugh then a couple of pints (which is what I do).

In reply to gingerkate: i agree, the argument of most seems based around an unproven 'fact' that everyone with practise can climb 6b. as this competition is obviously an all inclusive thing (if it was to decide britains best indoor climber it woudn't be worth having anything below 8a) to try and get people pushing themselves and improving at climbing all grades should be included as everyone will be at different levels and having a wider range of grades would surely benifit much more people at minimal cost.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I cannot believe people are whining about the lowest grade being 6b.

Let us begin:
1. If you cant climb 6b, then you are not going to win. If you are not attempting to win then go to the comp and watch or climb routes at your level.

2. This is a COMPETITION! Entering competitions in a discipline suggests a highish level of skill. 6b is not a highish level of skill. To be honest, if I was running the comp I would start it at 7a.

3. How is 6b a hard grade again?

In reply to Simon Caldwell:

running on a track...

Or rowing on a Concept machine indoors vs rowing outdoors? But wait, people *do* compete in indoor rowing!


In reply to all (in particular the person that suggested adding route down to 4/4+):

My main wall is Warrington, and the lead routes start at F5. Is that's the lowest they cater for at a regular wall for all people, F6b sounds fine to me to start a competition at. (Although personally I've been going backwards indoors for a while, and although I didn't once climb F6b, I don't at the moment so won't be entering, as don't see much point making the effort).

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

In conclusion, typical UKC "I cant climb for shit but want a badge to sew onto my harness and a certificate anyway" whinge which, in all fairness, was probably completely provoked by Mick Ryan. I had heard of no malcontent with the comp until I saw this thread.

I will also add that at no point in writing this did I suggest I was a great climber or that I could win the comp.

In reply to JoeL 90:
Exactly and in a nutshell.

In reply to Will Hunt:

You don't get it do you Will....on several points.

Never mind.

In reply to Will Hunt:
"Am prone to opening mouth without thinking and voicing bollocks climbing opinions."
I wouldn't disagree.
The comp is meant to give people things to train for over winter not decide Britains best climber. Also whether or not a climb is hard relates to how good a climber is, and so while you may not think 6b is hard someone who climbs 6a may do.

In reply to JoeL 90:
The way I heard it, climbing walls have plenty of routes set most of the time and at grades lower than 6b. If someone who cant climb 6b wants to take part in some sort of competition then there's no reason why them and some mates cant get a little competition going amongst themselves.

Obviously not to decide Britains "best" climber as the grades arent high enough for that. If the competition is simply for training purposes then Im not sure its really required. Walls would be open anyway (as well as the crags for that matter) for people to train on with routes spanning a wider range of grades.

If you want to enter a COMPETITION then you should be able to climb at a certain standard. Next thing we'll have UKCers complaining that Sunset Slab is too hard/bold for them and that there should be no less style in climbing it top roped so that they can join in the fun too...oh wait.

In reply to Simon Lee: It was indeed em, norom.

But in all seriousness I've never been in favour of climbing competions (yes, even when I was a route setter at Nottingham) and I see this 'ladder' as a 'bad thing'.

Furtherore if you think I'm afradi to express my opinions face to face you're very wrong.

If you want to chat about this over a pint email me at sloperclimbs@hotmail.com.

In reply to (No longer) Anonymous:
If you want to chat about this over a pint email me at sloperclimbs@hotmail.com.


I thought your fave tipple was a glass of Sauternes ?. Personally I am already on my third glass of Cotes du Rhone Gigondas this evening but I am never averse to a pint, particularly from the Abbeydale stable though I am not sure what there is left to discuss on this topic (carbon footprint perhaps?). If you think I am a champion of the BMC you have misjudged me though what you have against competitions is beyond me. Will email you in the morning.

Best, Simon

In reply to Will Hunt:

Will....you really need to read this:


"The BMC Leading Ladder is a new, fun competition. Taking part is an excellent way to improve your climbing standards. It's also a great way to get fit - and stay fit - over the winter months."

http://www.thebmc.co.uk/Feature.aspx?id=2076

In reply to Will Hunt: Despite your obvious dislike for people's liking of fairness on UKC, you yourself are also doing a think very common to UKCers in writing ill-informed nonsense. Read the information first.

(i dont claim to be innocent of writing ill informed crap)

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I suspect that many don't - I certainly can't see anything wrong with what Will has written.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Please can anybody on this Forum define what they mean by Elitist?

As far as I understand the majority of contributors to this specific topic, elitist seem to have been defined as "being able to climb better than others" and hence is a competition by its nature not elitsm?

For me, I would define elitism as "having an advantage due to resources which cannot be accessed or are available to others not being part of a specific group" This group would then be Elite.

for example in a climbing wall setting which is accessable to(and paid for) by all climbers who go there, a route setter (or the climbing wall owner) decides to set routes for a specific group of climbers. This, for example could be an overhanging part of the wall which has been set such that others, except that specific group, cannot access due to the way these routes have been set. A natural progression within this setting (climbing wall) in order to reach that standard is not possible.
Hence the climbing wall owner (or route setter)restricts resources and the availability to others to reach that standard.

I might be totally wrong here but I feel that quite often ability and/or being good (may be better than others) is confused with elitism.
On this subject, is is the British Climbing Team Elitism? I personally do not think so unless to be part of that team would rely upon who you know etc. rather than you ability and the wish to be part of it.


confused.

In reply to Petra Ernst:

I think the words elitism and elitist are too inflammatory which hasnt helped debate recalling as it does largely bygone hierarchies and class distinctions.

IMO opinion a better type of title would have been sonething like - BMC Leading Ladder Starts. Grades too hard?

A bit too boring for a stirrer like Mick though.

In reply to Simon Lee:

AGREE

Confused.

In reply to gingerkate: the logical progression of your argument is that 8a etc belong in the realms of 'punterdom' (i dislike use of that term and what it implies) which isnt true. i really dont think any of the posts re 6b not being exclusive are to do with looking down on others, its about what is difficult in absolute not relative terms. i imagine that theres a decent percentage of people (sports players) out there that you could put a harness on and, within their first evening at a wall, could top rope a 5+ / 6a without much stress. it is not unreasonable to suggest that 6b, for someone whos been climbing for some time, is a realistic objective.

In reply to Simon Lee:




I think you will find if you read the original news report that Mick first gave the facts and all the relevent information. Then Mick, after talking to several climbers, also spelled out some reservations.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/older.html?month=10&year=2007#40389

It was then thrown at the forums for others to comment. Some agreed that this 'leading ladder' maybe too elistist (in that all don't have the chance to participate), others disagreed saying that comps are by their nature elitist.

If you climb 6b and above and are interested in this 'leading ladder' this news report and thread will help, with all the other publicity, in alerting these climbers. Consider that the news page gets 3,000 views a day, the forums many times that and that on average 10,000 different climberrs visit UKClimbing.com each day.

It also may influence the next 'leading ladder' having a lower entry point.

Rather than 'stirring' Mick has again viewed objectively the bigger picture.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

And has a funny idea of what elitist means. As far as I can see the only reason this might be considered elitist is because it doesn't give much opportunity for those doomed to live miles away from any of the venues. The grades certainly aren't.

In reply to ksjs:
i imagine that theres a decent percentage of people (sports players) out there that you could put a harness on and, within their first evening at a wall, could top rope a 5+ / 6a without much stress. it is not unreasonable to suggest that 6b, for someone whos been climbing for some time, is a realistic objective.

and gymnasts that could do mid 7's, the point of the competitin seems to be to help train over winter in order to see a relative improvement.

Also no, the format of the competition isn't elitist.

In reply to GrahamD:

In this context it is very simple. When using 'elitist' the context is important.

In reply to JoeL 90:

this is how it seems from the original BMC press release (dated 11/07/2007) - "[the comp is for] those who may want to use the BMC Leading Ladder as a way of getting fit for major competitions or to push themselves and improve their climbing standards generally" (http://www.thebmc.co.uk/News.aspx?id=1994) - find the word fun in that one.

I think they must have changed tack at some point, but essentially its an added incentive to improve your climbing. If they lower the entry grade to something everyone can climb then it no longer provides that incentive - it'd sort of go along the lines of people have a go at some routes as if it were any evening at the wall, then think "I'll do better next year though" before going home and forgetting about it and not really improving.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Rather than 'stirring' Mick has again viewed objectively the bigger picture.


So objective in fact that he has taken to reporting on himself by himself in the third person. Such journalistic objectivity is commendable.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: When using 'elitist' the context is important.


If you knew that already why use it in a headline if you did not seek to be inflammatory ?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Any "...ism" (racism, sexism, ageism..) normally implies a 'bad thing' because it excludes people because of factors outside their control.

You are using "elitism" in a slightly different way here and I'd be interested to hear what your simple context based definition is in this case because, as an earlier poster pointed out, it does smack of daily express sensationalism for effect rather than objective reporting.

Thanks

In reply to Simon Lee:

I know how the word elitist is misinterpreted ; o )

Busy Simon.......another inflamatory news report, with video, coming your way soon.

In reply to Calder: As you say thats the original theres not much point in reading it if its been updated.

Including lower grades still provides an incentive. Instead of going home having failed on the first route some one who climbs less than 6b might go home thinking; ive done two routes next year or next round ill do 3. This would obviously be more benificial as it would give both a sense of achievement and a desire to do better.

In reply to Will Hunt:


Similarly, if you can't climb 7b then you're not going to win either.

A very tiny proportion of those entering any competition, in any discipline, stand even the remotest chance of winning. The vast majority are not competiting against those few. They are competing against themselves (trying to do as well as they can, or better than last time, or whatever). Or against their mates who are at a similar level of non-achievement.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: This wasn't exactly a news report, just a question whith a misued word, unfortunately.

In reply to JoeL 90:

No it was a news report with a bit of op-ed.....in fact looking at this thread a lot of op-ed.

Some news reports are totally factual, some are factual and have opinion.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

What on earth is op-ed ?

In reply to Simon Lee:

opposite editorial...newspaper term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editorial

In reply to Simon Caldwell:
So why pay one pound and enter your name into a competition then?! Walls will still tell you the supposed grades of what your climbing even if your not in the competition.

In reply to Will Hunt:
A good question.
Why do fell runners, cyclists, etc, pay to enter races when their criterion for success is just not coming last? They could run/cycle the same route for free.

In reply to Simon Lee:

I'll throw some more in. UKC is partly an aggregator and also contribitors plant seed ideas or topics that are then discussed or not.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

It all makes sense now - I'm just a puppet on a striiing

In reply to Simon Lee:

Not at all...that's old skool print media thinking. This is interactive and only exists because of the people who come here - its multi-way....not two-way top down.

Pick up a mag Simon....see anything that is wrong or annoys you?...Tough, there's no way you could question the person who wrote it. Here you can.

Much news, the photos, the articles at UKC are written and posted by us...collectively....for us......not for some publishing company to profit from.

Everyone has the opportunity at UKC to present their work to others and to question, discuss, comment on, be nihilst sometimes, constructive at other times, find a partner, comment or ask a question about Steve McClure's ascent or witness Pernell and Kirkpatrick get kicked back by a Pataogonia storm.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Or even watch and comment on something that happened last Wednesday.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=526

I didn't drive up there just for a beer.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Indeed masaging your ego and promoting the website had nowt to do with it.

In reply to Anonymous:

Everyone is promoted here, and demoted. Yes of course I promote this website silly.