/ Logbook Updates - Stats Charts, Feedback and Beta

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.

We have just finished a small set of changes to the Logbook section.

Stats
All crags now have a Stats tab which gives charts for grades available at the crag and what grades everyone logs. There is also a useful popularity of season chart and weather (just temperature at the moment).
Rainfall - we will be adding average rainfall to the temperature chart as soon as we have located a reliable and affordable source for this data.
Dovedale

Feedback
We have added a specific place for route feedback to differentiate it from personal ascent comments. Over the years lots of useful comments have been added to personal ascent comments but sometimes these are hidden, or they disappear down the list of ascents. The new route feedback section is public for everyone and is a place to add information about a route. This can be about a loose hold, a bird's nest or anything that you think might be useful.
Ten Craters of Wisdom (VS 5a)

Feedback Beta
We also encourage people to add route beta to the feedback notes - hints on moves and holds, or specific gear requirements. Each comment has a beta flag available so if you do add beta, then flag it as such. This enables those who don't want beta to hide it using a general setting across the site.
Old comments - The feedback comments have been pre-populated with data from the Rockfax Route database. This was very popular around 10 years ago but has become much less popular as UKC Logbook took over. This means that a lot of the current comments are around 10 or more years old. Most still have relevance though and they will drift down the list as new comments arrive.

Hope you like the new features which are the work of Andy and Paul.

Alan

Post edited at 10:00
Report
Gordon Stainforth - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Lovely charts and feedback beta really useful.

Report
SGD - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Perfect timing. I climbed at Symonds Yat over the weekend and we inadvertently disturbed what we think was an Owl's nest and was wondering if I could add a comment to this effect.   Hole in the Wall (HVS 5a)

Report
alexm198 - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to SGD:

I love that you've flagged that as beta. "Match hands on owl and rock onto high right foot".

Report
SGD - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to alexm198:

I haven't have I?

D'oh! if I have.....

Report
iainJ - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

When logging a route on mobile (chrome on android) it won't let you log without feedback being included. 'feedback must not be in all capitals' error occurs  even when none has been entered. 

Post edited at 11:01
Report
In reply to SGD:

Actually you hadn't marked it as beta but you had revealed that our logic was misleading. A question mark has now been added.

Alan

Report
In reply to iainJ:

Was it this morning you had the issue, as I thought I had fixed that bug last night?

Report
SGD - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Ta muchley

Report
iainJ - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Andy Ovens - UKC and UKH:

Ah, it was last night it wasn't working, but it wouldn't let me report it then. 

Post edited at 12:29
Report
Adam Perrett on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Hi. Love the new Stats and Weather tabs. Feedback and Beta are good additions too.

The Stats tab works in Chrome on my WIn7 PC but not in Internet Explorer 11 (I have add-ons disabled. I enabled all the add-ons and still no joy.).

Should it work? I know IE11 is quite old now.

Also, if I tag beta, an error box asks if I am logged in. I am.

Keep up the great work.

Report
Coel Hellier - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Ah, good to see "feedback" (I've long thought that something was lost when people stopped giving Rockfax database comments).

Can I suggest that you do not discourage grade opinions by saying "please use the voting system for grade and star opinions"?  Yes, if someone is merely going to say "HVS **" or whatever, then that's better done on the voting system, but if they're going to give a comment to explain their opinion then that is useful (and I suspect you won't be flooded by too many of them). 

Report
Stroppy - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Hi Alan,

I really like the new stats feature as it helps to know what routes are getting done and when. Feels like this will be better than looking at latest ascents if you are thinking of visiting a crag, but not in the next few days.

To be honest I have reservations about the feedback element. Before I knew these updates had happened I logged Pleasure Dome (E3 5c) and noticed the historical comments in the feedback section and wondered where they came from. Perhaps it is specific to this climb but the 'feedback' didn't seem any different from the general comments (except for being old). So a couple of questions really:

- Do you think it would be better to start without the Rockfax comments which are mostly historic and possibly not differentiated from general ascent comments?

- What is going to differentiate feedback from general comments in the future? I like the concept but feels like there is a risk we end up with two comments sections.

Stroppy

Report
In reply to Coel Hellier:

> Can I suggest that you do not discourage grade opinions by saying "please use the voting system for grade and star opinions"?  Yes, if someone is merely going to say "HVS **" or whatever, then that's better done on the voting system, but if they're going to give a comment to explain their opinion then that is useful (and I suspect you won't be flooded by too many of them). 

Thanks for the suggestion. We are not going to do that though since I am sure there will still be plenty of grade comments in feedback. We really do want to increase the voting a bit though since sometimes there are 100s of ascents and only a handful of votes.

Alan

Report
In reply to Stroppy:

I think you have missed the point here. The new Feedback section is specifically designed to split the two since the personal ascent comments contained around 90% personal stuff, and around 10% useful feedback. That made finding the useful feedback difficult since you had to scroll miles to find it. 

Now people can log their own personal ascent comments, and keep them private, and also feedback on the routes which is not private. You couldn't give feedback and keep your personal comments private before.

The old stuff from Rockfax is mostly general comments hence appropriate for where it now is. It was always presented like that and there was never any 'route logging' on the RF database.

There are bound to be a few discrepancies, and there will be hundreds of useful comments in the personal ascent comments that will be in the wrong place, and maybe we will create a simply switch to swap those since that might be handy. 

Alan

Report
Tyler - on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

The beta thing is very useful can I make my feedback comments public whilst keeping logbook private or partners only?

Can I do this retrospectively?

Report
Luke90 on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Stroppy:

I agree. Interesting idea to differentiate personal experience from feedback that's useful to others but I think it's going to be a difficult line to judge. Some people will always be convinced that their personal experience is useful to everyone while others will be much more hesitant. If I was designing the feature, I think I would have let people upvote/like/promote existing logbook comments and then pinned comments that were widely regarded as useful to the top of the comments section. Probably with the same beta flag, that's a smart addition.

Report
biggianthead on 24 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Since the changes I can no longer record routes climbed!

Report
In reply to biggianthead:

There was a problem last night, but that should all be fixed now. I've emailed you asking for more info

Report
In reply to Tyler:

> The beta thing is very useful can I make my feedback comments public whilst keeping logbook private or partners only?

> Can I do this retrospectively?

Feedback comments are always public. You change the privacy of your logbook data in the user options, and this will affect every entry you have made (so it is retrospective), while keeping feedback public.

Report
In reply to Tyler:

> The beta thing is very useful can I make my feedback comments public whilst keeping logbook private or partners only?

> Can I do this retrospectively?

We have added an option now so that you can copy your own comments to Public Feedback if you want for the comments which contain useful information rather than just personal ascent notes. It will just copy it so you may want to delete your own personal notes although this isn't required.

Alan

Report
Tyler - on 25 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

That's what I was getting at. Now I've whinged about it I better share some pearls of wisdom (mind you, most of my comments are appeals to upgrade a route!)

Report
TonyB - on 25 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

This looks great. I have found the popularity feature on Mountain Project to be helpful when planning trips, and a similar feature on UKC seems very useful. 

One thing that would also be useful would be to be able to ask the logbooks, "What were the most recent accents in Chee Dale?". If for example, I would like to know if the Cornice is dry. Is there a neat way of doing this or should I just look at individual routes? I just checked and it doesn't look like anyone has ticked routes since September, so I'm not after a conditions report at the moment, but curious if such a search was possible or something you had in the pipeline.

Report
kristian - on 25 Apr 2019
In reply to TonyB:

You already can select "Latest Ascents" for crags and it shows that there were two routes climbed at the cornice this week.

Select the drop down box top right.

Report
teh_mark on 26 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Minor point - if you open up the logbook options from the logbook page (the cogs icon) you don't get the option to hide beta in feedback, but if you go into the logbook subcategory of the main user options page you do. These two settings pages are otherwise identical in their content.

Post edited at 00:52
Report
snoop6060 - on 26 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

That's a good addition. Be nice when clicking the bars in the grade distribution chart if it took you to a list of them. You could combine this feature with the ability to filter the route lists by grade when looking at a crag. 

Post edited at 06:12
Report
In reply to TonyB:

> One thing that would also be useful would be to be able to ask the logbooks, "What were the most recent accents in Chee Dale?". If for example, I would like to know if the Cornice is dry. Is there a neat way of doing this or should I just look at individual routes?

As Kristian says, you can check the recent ascents for every crag. You can also create a specific Conditions page using Logbook > Conditions > My Conditions. You can add a specific set of crags to there to check who has climbed what recently.

Alan

Report
TonyB - on 26 Apr 2019
In reply to kristian and Alan:

Thanks for that. It looks like a really useful feature, I just hadn't worked out how to use it! I will start adding my favourite crags!

Cheers, Tony

Report
kristian - on 27 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Is there a way to save preferences for "my conditions". I can't seem to get it to save anyway.

Report
Offwidth - on 28 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Really great additions. As a definitive guide volunteer and trad obscurist I always found the feedback linked to a 'named' user (that I know I can trust) very useful.

Votes clearly get you the nearest grade (or borderline) but in terms of sub grade accuracy I still think you are doomed to failure on grade votes due to things like confirmation bias and different user groups voting.  If I were you I'd consider having the possibility of seeng how specific users vote (like Mountain Project do) or have a trusted leader status and average those when determining grades for guidebooks.

Inverted V shows a mid VS grade on 460 votes. It's an easy VS dragged up by ego voting and confirmation bias

https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/ukc/logbook_updates_-_stats_charts_feedback_and_beta-703734?v=1

Counts Crack is on the upper edge of mid VS on your votes, barely harder than Inverted V and its at the opposite end of the VS grade according to the definitive team.

Count's Crack (VS 4c)

I bet if you just looked at the 75 voters on this route for their average for Inverted V it would be low VS.

Another example ...Thrombosis is a brutal VS that I'd say is certainly more awkward and maybe harder than its near neighbour Agony Crack....

Thrombosis (VS 5a)

Agony Crack (HVS 5a)

...  which comes out as half a grade harder as confirmation bias adds HVS votes and being an easy safe HVS it gets plenty of ego voting.

Report
jbrom - on 28 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

One thing, when copying a logbook comment to feedback, the feedback is dated the day the info was copied. Would it be possible to also copy the date across as some feedback would definitely be date dependant. 

An example would be a logbook comment about a dodgy lower off that I added to my logbook last November, this would clearly be better as feedback. Just copied it across and it posted with today's date, the lower off condition may have changed since I made the comment, so the date is relevant.

Report
Big Lee - on 30 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

The stats page look good. I noticed the number of logs per grade stats for this crag don't appear for some reason. It looks like some sort of error.

Østmarka Bouldering#stats

It's the same on both my laptop and mobile (both Chrome), so I don't think it's the platform, and it's the same with Chrome and Edge.

Report
In reply to Big Lee:

> The stats page look good. I noticed the number of logs per grade stats for this crag don't appear for some reason. It looks like some sort of error.

Thanks for letting me know. Fixed now. It was because it was displaying the number of logs for the aid climbs at the crag, and since no one has logged an aid route there, it displayed an empty graph!

Report
Appleby on 30 Apr 2019
In reply to jbrom:

I agree. The original  date is important, particularly where comments relate to the quality of pegs, rockfall etc.

Report
scope on 30 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Given that trad routes are graded for an onsight lead, I'd prefer any beta to be hidden by default, rather than being an opt out feature.

Report
In reply to scope:

> Given that trad routes are graded for an onsight lead, I'd prefer any beta to be hidden by default, rather than being an opt out feature.

Why don't you just opt out in your User Options then they will be hidden by default?

Alan

Report
Phil79 - on 30 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Great stuff. However, the new features don't appear for the Dewerstone? Or at least, they don't when I look at that page.

The Dewerstone

Report
scope on 30 Apr 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Very helpful. Thanks for the insight.

I will obviously change my user settings, however I would prefer it if I didn't need to change settings in order to preserve the status quo. Will beta show up if I view a climb page whilst not logged in, perhaps because I'm using a different device to view logbooks? Onsight blown.

Post edited at 14:30
Report
In reply to Phil79:

Seems to be working for me, can I ask what browser you are using please? And potentially the version if IE

Report
In reply to scope:

> I will obviously change my user settings, however I would prefer it if I didn't need to change settings in order to preserve the status quo. Will beta show up if I view a climb page whilst not logged in, perhaps because I'm using a different device to view logbooks? Onsight blown.

It is a tick box above the Feedback comments shown on every route as well so pretty easy.

If you are that worried about beta then you really shouldn't have been reading the logbooks for the last 15 years since there was beta all over the personal comments, often in the user-submitted descriptions and, let's be honest, many of the guidebook route descriptions. At least now feedback beta it is flagged so you know not to look and you have the option to globally hide it.

Alan

Report
Phil79 - on 30 Apr 2019
In reply to Andy Ovens - UKC and UKH:

Hi Andy - have cleared chrome cache and now appears as expected.

Report
Emilio Bachini on 03 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Any chance of having an area as a search criteria for logbooks in the future?

For example rather than specific crags like Las Encantades and then Arab Steps I can search my entire logbook for El Chorro? 

Report
Emilio Bachini on 16 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Is it possible (or does it already exist and I haven’t got it to work) to make routes on a wish list automatically remove themselves  once they’ve been climbed?

I understand some people would like them to also stay on there but if everyone had the option to turn something on or off it’d be great. 

Report
Jon Read - on 16 May 2019
In reply to Emilio Bachini:

That would be a very nice function.

If I may also take this chance to reiterate a wishlist wish... it would be great if you could map out the crags where you have wishlist routes, for holiday planning and seeing what you want to do in a specific area (e.g., the best weather option).

Report
SDM on 16 May 2019
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

> Is there a way to save preferences for "my conditions". I can't seem to get it to save anyway.

This would be a great addition (assuming I'm not being blind and missing an existing option.

During the warmer months, I usually use the conditions page to check a subset of crags in the peak area (and further afield) to get an idea of the state of seepage / condensation. So I'm not interested in knowing the hundreds of routes logged at Stanage and Froggatt etc which I know will dry fairly quickly after any rainfall.  It takes a while to filter for the crags I am / am not interested in or to skim over the irrelevant entries.

Being able to save my filters for next time would be a great help and would also save time when planning for destinations further afield.

Whilst I'm on the subject of Conditions feature wishlists: an ability to draw a custom area on a map (similar to Rightmove, Zoopla etc) would be great for foreign trips.

Report
Emilio Bachini on 09:23 Sun
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Hello again, it seems like an obvious one but is it possible to have the option to add routes to a tick list, just as it is to add them to a logbook or wish list?

Creating a tick list is currently very slow and not user friendly, at least on a mobile device. 

Many thanks for your time and everything else. Emilio. 

Report
Jonathan Emett - on 09:50 Sun
In reply to Alan James - UKC and UKH:

Thanks, those are useful additions. Are there a few gremlins in the edge cases though? For example rodellar stats show 1 9b+ listed, and that it has been logged once. But the only climb of that grade has no ascents. There are also several 9a+s listed but only one in the stats. (Obvs, info on these grades is critical for my crag selection ... Ha. Ha)

Report
In reply to Emilio Bachini:

Thanks for the feedback, we will support for adding routes to a ticklist from the crag page in the future.

Report
In reply to Jonathan Emett:

Thanks, I've fixed that - No match for crag id:0. We have a trash field on logbook entries in the database so it can be synced with the Rockfax app. The stats graph wasn't taking into account when that was set.

I think the guy that had ticked and subsequently deleted the 9b+ had been trolled by his mates at some point as I just removed a load of crap from his user profile.

Post edited at 10:31
Report
duchessofmalfi - on 10:37 Sun
In reply to Paul Phillips - UKC and UKH:

I just keep seeing ancient log entries cropping up as "comments" and this is quite irritating as it just spams up the route information:

eg:

Once Pegged Wall VS 5a

Feedback

Always Hide βeta

UserDateNotes

Si dH12 Nov, 2006the right grade, one hardish move, all well-protected. There is very little finger-jamming involved if you use the available holds. βeta?

Al Evans30 Sep, 2006Great training for Regent Street βeta?

Headjam12 Aug, 2006I think the finger-jamming on this is actually quite technical (and I like jamming !), and the feet at the top bit before the top aren't that good - it's quite steep. I'd stick with 5a. βeta?

DannyC12 Jul, 2006i found it slightly hard for vs but then i can't finger jam very well. my mate who has just started climbing secondede it with no trouble although he's 6'4" and could just reach the top ledge by stnding in the crack. bastard. vs 4c seems fair enough. βeta?

Jonathan T25 Apr, 2005VS 5a? Nice little route with loads of gear. βeta?

GrahamD4 Oct, 2004A good technical little route which will feel stiff for 4c ! βeta?

shaun walby26 Sep, 2004Found it a bit tricky, but it was my first route back on grit after spanish limestone. Good gear all the way. βeta?

Monk9 May, 2003Quite stiff but excellent protection. A good route. βeta?

led15 Apr, 2002Not quite as amenable a climb if you have big fingers! βeta?

Report
In reply to duchessofmalfi:

> I just keep seeing ancient log entries cropping up as "comments" and this is quite irritating as it just spams up the route information:

Spam? They are almost all totally relevant still and will eventually be usurped by more recent comments as those build up.

The comments system was imported from the Rockfax database which had a load of feedback comments from 2002 until UKC logbook gradually pushed it out after 2006ish (although it is still accepting feedback comments even now). The problem with the original UKC comments is that they were a mix of lots of personal ascent comments - not interesting for everyone - and some useful feedback like the old Rockfax comments. So we added the Rockfax comment field as a separate field to UKC logbooks but we didn’t want to lose all the old Rockfax comments when doing this. This is because, as in the example you quote, there are many fully relevant comments in it and the fact that someone said that thin fingers are useful for Once Pegged Wall (VS 5a) in 2006 probably means that they are still useful in 2019 as well.

We have also added a system where you can copy your personal ascent comments across to feedback comments where they are relevant.

Alan

Report

Please Register as a New User in order to reply to this topic.