With all the link-ups and extensions creating increasingly longer routes, for example in the the Santa Linya cave, I think an interesting question presents itself: How do we grade pure endurance? I mean, is there a formula like 8c+ + 8c+ = 9a+? If so, when is it valid? If you don't get pumped, and there's no real crux, it doesn't really matter how long the route is. This could mean we'll see 9a+ onsights pretty soon, probably from 14 year olds. A short 9a might be too powerful, but 8c + 8c + 8c might work, no? Maybe it's time to put a hardest move or boulder sequence into the equation. In fact, looking at the descriptions of the hardest non mega link-up routes in the world, it seems most have a crux sequence somewhere in the 8A+ to 8B+ region. A few examples: Akira: 9b?/8B+ Salamandre: 9a+/b?/8A+/B Coup de grace: 9a+?/8B Corona: 9a+?/8B Open air: 9a+/8A+ Jaws II: 9a+?/8A+ Overshadow: 9a+?/8A+ For obvious reasons, this is only true for routes of "average" length, or at least where the difficult part is not too long. The likes of Jumbo love, the Santa Linya link-ups and other monster routes don't quite fit in here. That said, I've absolutely no idea how difficult the crux sequences of these routes are and might, hence, be way off in my speculations.
And, yes, yes, I know it's not as simple as that. Grading must always be subjective, but it seems Dani is using a formula similar to the one I presented above, so I don't think the question posted is totally irrelevant. So now you know. The next time you hear I've done a 9b FA, you can be sure it's solid ;)