This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Neil Mawson talks about making the 2nd re-ascent of Parthian Shot over the Easter weekend.
"It's not your normal grit route needing very cold conditions, as all the holds are relatively big and it's more about hanging on to recover for the crux at the top..."
Find out why Neil thinks this is THE hard grit route, but still isn't hard enough to be E10.
Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68875
In reply to UKC News:
Hmm. What does the panel make of that, er “high runner in Brook’s Crack”, if anything?
jcm
Hmm. What does the panel make of that, er “high runner in Brook’s Crack”, if anything?
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
On the face of it, it looks like a sensible backup to the remaining flake gear (and as noted in the article text, the new version of Parthian has been done that way both times).
However, if the wires rip/flake snaps then I have a nasty feeling that it would merely serve to send the plunging climber swinging towards the base of Brook's crack at a rather less than optimal speed, probably head-first.
On the face of it, it looks like a sensible backup to the remaining flake gear (and as noted in the article text, the new version of Parthian has been done that way both times).
However, if the wires rip/flake snaps then I have a nasty feeling that it would merely serve to send the plunging climber swinging towards the base of Brook's crack at a rather less than optimal speed, probably head-first.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Well since the flake broke it's only been climbed with a side runner. Ben used it on the first re-ascent and now Neil has used it.
Yeah it'll be an improvement on style if it gets eliminated but for now it is what it is, a classic E9.
Well since the flake broke it's only been climbed with a side runner. Ben used it on the first re-ascent and now Neil has used it.
Yeah it'll be an improvement on style if it gets eliminated but for now it is what it is, a classic E9.
In reply to UKC News:
Is this the first ascent of the route, in any style, before or after breakage, without taking a fall? Thought Dunne was the only one to have done it that way.
Is this the first ascent of the route, in any style, before or after breakage, without taking a fall? Thought Dunne was the only one to have done it that way.
In reply to deacondeacon:
a classic E10 currently climbed with a side runner, making it E9?
> Yeah it'll be an improvement on style if it gets eliminated but for now it is what it is, a classic E9.
a classic E10 currently climbed with a side runner, making it E9?
In reply to UKC News:
I could be wrong but isn't the side runner a good bit higher than where Ben had it? I thought the one he had was really just to protect the moves up to the flake (too low for the top section)?
I could be wrong but isn't the side runner a good bit higher than where Ben had it? I thought the one he had was really just to protect the moves up to the flake (too low for the top section)?
In reply to UKC News:
I'm a bit confused by 'Makes 2nd Re-Ascent of Parthian Shot, E9/10'. Did the original route vanish when somebody broke it? I thought quite a few people had done 'Parthian'? Does the route become invalid if someone breaks a hold or knackers a placement?
This does sort of link to a question asked about other routes - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=584879&v=1#x7748337
When do we wipe out a route and say it 'hasn't been done' and its open for a 'new ascent'?
I am fully aware that this is a 'click-maker' designed to provoke a response. But I've responded.
I'm a bit confused by 'Makes 2nd Re-Ascent of Parthian Shot, E9/10'. Did the original route vanish when somebody broke it? I thought quite a few people had done 'Parthian'? Does the route become invalid if someone breaks a hold or knackers a placement?
This does sort of link to a question asked about other routes - http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=584879&v=1#x7748337
When do we wipe out a route and say it 'hasn't been done' and its open for a 'new ascent'?
I am fully aware that this is a 'click-maker' designed to provoke a response. But I've responded.
In reply to spidermonkey09:
This from Alex Ekins 28 Nov 2013
Toru (Nakajima) led the 2nd ascent of the wall below Parthian Shot (Nocturnal Emissions E9 6c?) placing gear on lead, he then carried on straight into Parthian, placing 3 pieces in the flake on lead, he spent ages at the top of the flake before shaking his way to top. I don't remember him slapping.
Alex Ekins - 28 Nov 2013 http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=570753
This from Alex Ekins 28 Nov 2013
Toru (Nakajima) led the 2nd ascent of the wall below Parthian Shot (Nocturnal Emissions E9 6c?) placing gear on lead, he then carried on straight into Parthian, placing 3 pieces in the flake on lead, he spent ages at the top of the flake before shaking his way to top. I don't remember him slapping.
Alex Ekins - 28 Nov 2013 http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=570753
In reply to andyathome:
It's just interesting historically since the route has changed significantly (and got harder). Obviously the previous route and its ascents don't become 'invalid'.
It's just interesting historically since the route has changed significantly (and got harder). Obviously the previous route and its ascents don't become 'invalid'.
In reply to andyathome:
No. That's why the news story says "re-ascent" rather than "ascent" and talks about the "2nd ascent of Parthian Shot in its current state after the flake was broken", rather than the "2nd ascent ever of Bransby's Buttress".
Hope this clears things up.
> I'm a bit confused by 'Makes 2nd Re-Ascent of Parthian Shot, E9/10'. Did the original route vanish when somebody broke it? I thought quite a few people had done 'Parthian'? Does the route become invalid if someone breaks a hold or knackers a placement?
No. That's why the news story says "re-ascent" rather than "ascent" and talks about the "2nd ascent of Parthian Shot in its current state after the flake was broken", rather than the "2nd ascent ever of Bransby's Buttress".
Hope this clears things up.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
Is that 'harder' or 'more serious'? I do realise they may be the same thing )
> the route has changed significantly (and got harder).
Is that 'harder' or 'more serious'? I do realise they may be the same thing )
In reply to UKC News:
this is the clearest and most open article I've read for a while in regard to to the style of ascent, if you've got confused, read it again.
this is the clearest and most open article I've read for a while in regard to to the style of ascent, if you've got confused, read it again.
In reply to spidermonkey09:
Hi,
Toru (Nakajima)led Parthian Shot (with a direct start) in 2009, placing the gear on lead without falling off. Alex Ekins who videoed the ascent stated (in reply to a statement on UKC news about PS " the floodgates opened and many others repeated the route, all falling onto the flake in the process")
that:
I feel it is worth noting for the sake of historical accuracy that Toru Nakajima repeated Parthian Shot without a fall.
cheers
Graham
Hi,
Toru (Nakajima)led Parthian Shot (with a direct start) in 2009, placing the gear on lead without falling off. Alex Ekins who videoed the ascent stated (in reply to a statement on UKC news about PS " the floodgates opened and many others repeated the route, all falling onto the flake in the process")
that:
I feel it is worth noting for the sake of historical accuracy that Toru Nakajima repeated Parthian Shot without a fall.
cheers
Graham
In reply to UKC News:
Two questions:
1) Why is is started from the right rather than the middle/left arete? Is that still to do? I assume it's climbable as Dynamics of Change goes up there.
2) How can it be E10 if the flake held Ben on the re-ascent? No death fall = no E10 surely?
Two questions:
1) Why is is started from the right rather than the middle/left arete? Is that still to do? I assume it's climbable as Dynamics of Change goes up there.
2) How can it be E10 if the flake held Ben on the re-ascent? No death fall = no E10 surely?
In reply to Removed User:
I suggest you go away and actually learn how the E grade system actually works.
> 2) How can it be E10 if the flake held Ben on the re-ascent? No death fall = no E10 surely?
I suggest you go away and actually learn how the E grade system actually works.
In reply to Removed User:
What are you on about? There are tons and tons of routes where direct starts or direct finishes get added to a route but they don't suddenly become the original route. They're just new (usually harder) variations.
Oh hang on you're E10= death comment shows you don't know what you're talking about, never mind.
> So why is this not the definitive way? Isn't this the real Parthian Shot?
What are you on about? There are tons and tons of routes where direct starts or direct finishes get added to a route but they don't suddenly become the original route. They're just new (usually harder) variations.
Oh hang on you're E10= death comment shows you don't know what you're talking about, never mind.
In reply to The Pylon King:
So that you can decide for yourself wether you'd give it the grade of E9 or E10 rather than just guessing a grade from your armchair.
> Why should i?
So that you can decide for yourself wether you'd give it the grade of E9 or E10 rather than just guessing a grade from your armchair.
In reply to andyathome:
In the article he says it hasn't made a huge difference but not having a good jug to place the gear from has made it more strenuous.
> Is that 'harder' or 'more serious'? I do realise they may be the same thing )
In the article he says it hasn't made a huge difference but not having a good jug to place the gear from has made it more strenuous.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
It's got harder and more serious. from 8a+ ish climbing to hard 8b climbing, I seem to remember Bransby writing somewhere. And from a lot of questionable gear to not much questionable gear.
The article really couldn't have been clearer about how the route was done. There is some ridiculous comments on this thread, Ukc at it's worst.
Well done Neil, great effort
> In the article he says it hasn't made a huge difference but not having a good jug to place the gear from has made it more strenuous.
It's got harder and more serious. from 8a+ ish climbing to hard 8b climbing, I seem to remember Bransby writing somewhere. And from a lot of questionable gear to not much questionable gear.
The article really couldn't have been clearer about how the route was done. There is some ridiculous comments on this thread, Ukc at it's worst.
Well done Neil, great effort
In reply to GDes:
Rubbish, its an internet discussion forum, its called free speech.
> There is some ridiculous comments on this thread, Ukc at it's worst.
Rubbish, its an internet discussion forum, its called free speech.
Post edited at 09:15
In reply to deacondeacon:
Rubbish, I can see fairly well from my armcahir that a side runner can reduce the grade esp if its given E9/10 with a side runner. I presume that without the side runner then its more likely to be E10.
> So that you can decide for yourself wether you'd give it the grade of E9 or E10 rather than just guessing a grade from your armchair.
Rubbish, I can see fairly well from my armcahir that a side runner can reduce the grade esp if its given E9/10 with a side runner. I presume that without the side runner then its more likely to be E10.
Post edited at 09:14
In reply to The Pylon King:
Right on. Theoretically a route may not need to be a death rroute to be E10, but if its only 8b it certainly needs a serious element of danger. Maybe the gear holding was a total fluke though? I wouldn't know...
If a route changes significantly surely a rename isn't that outrageous either? People shouldn't be slagged off for using siderunners, they often make dangerous routes more enjoyable, but we also shouldn't be kidding ourselves that the main challenge is still standing there unclimbed!
Right on. Theoretically a route may not need to be a death rroute to be E10, but if its only 8b it certainly needs a serious element of danger. Maybe the gear holding was a total fluke though? I wouldn't know...
If a route changes significantly surely a rename isn't that outrageous either? People shouldn't be slagged off for using siderunners, they often make dangerous routes more enjoyable, but we also shouldn't be kidding ourselves that the main challenge is still standing there unclimbed!
In reply to Franco Cookson:
>but we also shouldn't be kidding ourselves that the main challenge is still standing there unclimbed!
I've lost the thread a bit. Didn't you mean 'isn't' still standing there unclimbed?
The route's not been done, basically. Doing it with off-route runners may be a good effort and a step forward in the route's evolution, but that's all.
jcm
>but we also shouldn't be kidding ourselves that the main challenge is still standing there unclimbed!
I've lost the thread a bit. Didn't you mean 'isn't' still standing there unclimbed?
The route's not been done, basically. Doing it with off-route runners may be a good effort and a step forward in the route's evolution, but that's all.
jcm
In reply to Franco Cookson:
FWIW, from the first post:
"Find out why Neil thinks this is THE hard grit route, but still isn't hard enough to be E10."
FWIW, from the first post:
"Find out why Neil thinks this is THE hard grit route, but still isn't hard enough to be E10."
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
I'll buy you a pint if you lower down to the crux of parthian and jump off with a rope through that side runner.
Id also be interested in what constitutes an off route side runner in this case. As im sure you're aware Parthian starts up brooks before moving left, is an extra move or two to get the high runner in not 'allowed' by the ethics committee these days?
I'll buy you a pint if you lower down to the crux of parthian and jump off with a rope through that side runner.
Id also be interested in what constitutes an off route side runner in this case. As im sure you're aware Parthian starts up brooks before moving left, is an extra move or two to get the high runner in not 'allowed' by the ethics committee these days?
In reply to remus:
>As im sure you're aware Parthian starts up brooks before moving left, is an extra move or two to get the high runner in not 'allowed' by the ethics committee these days?
Anything's "allowed". But everyone knows what a clean lead of a route is, and side runners aren't it.
jcm
>As im sure you're aware Parthian starts up brooks before moving left, is an extra move or two to get the high runner in not 'allowed' by the ethics committee these days?
Anything's "allowed". But everyone knows what a clean lead of a route is, and side runners aren't it.
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Im just wondering where you draw the line. Suppose Neil could place the runner at a stretch before immediately moving left in to the start of the hard climbing, would that be allowed?
It just seems awfully vague to say "everyone knows what a clean lead of a route is" to justify a statement like "The route's not been done, basically."
Im just wondering where you draw the line. Suppose Neil could place the runner at a stretch before immediately moving left in to the start of the hard climbing, would that be allowed?
It just seems awfully vague to say "everyone knows what a clean lead of a route is" to justify a statement like "The route's not been done, basically."
In reply to remus:
allowed/not allowed - whatever; it's not a science. John Dunne didn't use that high runner 25 years ago.
Anyway, in truth the route needs a proper relead in the style in which Toru N did it, i.e. starting from directly below. Moving out from a VS at one-third height or so is never satisfactory.
jcm
allowed/not allowed - whatever; it's not a science. John Dunne didn't use that high runner 25 years ago.
Anyway, in truth the route needs a proper relead in the style in which Toru N did it, i.e. starting from directly below. Moving out from a VS at one-third height or so is never satisfactory.
jcm
In reply to remus:
Re- off-route runners, I use a simple definition. If I can place the runner when I'm on the holds of the route it is on-route. If I have to move away from them and reverse to get back on line it is an off-route runner. The fact that someone taller could reach higher up a crack is just how it is. Once again the taller climber has an advantage over the shorter one - always has, and always will have for the vast majority of hard routes, particularly on grit!
cheers
Graham
Re- off-route runners, I use a simple definition. If I can place the runner when I'm on the holds of the route it is on-route. If I have to move away from them and reverse to get back on line it is an off-route runner. The fact that someone taller could reach higher up a crack is just how it is. Once again the taller climber has an advantage over the shorter one - always has, and always will have for the vast majority of hard routes, particularly on grit!
cheers
Graham
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
I agree, the 'true line' of the prow would be the direct start, thus negating any arguments over side runners, but that route is not what is historically called Parthian Shot.
It's an impressive ascent nonetheless due to being one of the few to not take a lead fall - just shows how good Dunne was when he was at the top of his game.
I agree, the 'true line' of the prow would be the direct start, thus negating any arguments over side runners, but that route is not what is historically called Parthian Shot.
It's an impressive ascent nonetheless due to being one of the few to not take a lead fall - just shows how good Dunne was when he was at the top of his game.
In reply to The Pylon King:
Sounds more like a load of people with no idea spouting crap.
> Rubbish, its an internet discussion forum, its called free speech.
Sounds more like a load of people with no idea spouting crap.
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
'Moving out from a VS at one-third height or so is never satisfactory.'
If Grimer describes something as 'One of the best routes anywhere Ever' I'm thinking the gritstone cognosenti might be disagreeing with you.
'Moving out from a VS at one-third height or so is never satisfactory.'
If Grimer describes something as 'One of the best routes anywhere Ever' I'm thinking the gritstone cognosenti might be disagreeing with you.
In reply to Dave Foster:
Why? Its hilarious. People expect to be taken seriously when they say stupid things like, "how can it be E10" its not a death fall.
> Stop reading it then?
Why? Its hilarious. People expect to be taken seriously when they say stupid things like, "how can it be E10" its not a death fall.
In reply to Adam Lincoln:
Amen to that. I think these articles are only put on so armchair pundits can spout shit on something they know nothing about.
Nice one Neil.
Amen to that. I think these articles are only put on so armchair pundits can spout shit on something they know nothing about.
Nice one Neil.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...