pope

Are you talking about the folks who stick 'em where they don't belong...to heck with what everybody else thinks? Like the clowns who recently "improved" Centerfold? Cowboy up and do 'em. That might resolve the next issue that you bring up: Huh? Didn't you just comment about how so many routes aren't getting done? Doesn't sound like you need more routes. Just more ability and vision. A lot of people noticed that. Without sport cliffs, most of the "annoying LA types" wouldn't have anything to do with climbing, as has been noted previously.

Actually I never advocated removing that anchor, although I wouldn't have objected. I recently read that part of it was missing and I thought now is the time to at least discuss whether or not it should have been there in the first place.

Fine, until they show up in places where they clearly don't belong.

If you don't know the answer to that..... Obviously, a pitch should end at a logical stance near the end of the rope or when the climbing peters out or dramatically changes direction. BTW 60m ropes are a fad that will fade. What definitely should be avoided is the creation of 40-foot pitches when a route logically continues beyond.

Minx, I would hope every rock climber would cringe at the idea of sticking an anchor a fraction of the way up a crack pitch of ANY difficulty. Whether the full pitch is something way out of your league or whether you could free solo it SHOULD be irrelevant. To illustrate, imagine a climb like Illusion Dweller in Joshua Tree. If you can handle 5.10-, you can probably finish that pitch (which features its crux near the top). Now let's suppose that you, Minx, are a 5.10- climber who loves climbing cracks (which you state to be true) and who can finish that pitch (which we can assume to be true if you can handle the "shorty" version of Japanese Gardens). Now let's suppose a 5.8 Mountie decides that if Illusion Dweller featured an anchor 30 feet below the top, it would "add" an excellent 5.8 pitch to Joshua Tree. Would you support that? What about creating a nice 5.6 climb by putting an anchor below the bulge on Classic Crack? I think you would not. You see, it's all a matter of degree. The "shorty" version of Japanese Gardens appeals to you and that is precisely why you think the anchor is appropriate. Anybody who thinks otherwise must be intolerant of climbers who pursue moderate climbs. Well, I think you're missing the point. That short anchor on Japanese Gardens is a bad idea regardless of how hard the long pitch or short pitch is, and definitely regardless of Minx's desires and abilities/limitations.

Johnny Cash Read about how Johnny single-handedly reduced the population of California condors from 53 to 9 while fishing in 2 inches of water! Great stuff.

Lisa is flashing "the shocker"!

Now, if you photo-shop-crop the bimbo out of this, you get some quality alpine pron.

Don't play that game, for every moderate you name I can name twice or three times as many hard routes. Besides, there are not many more moderates than you listed above. Sure, but for every hard route you can name (and who can't?), you can probably find a point 40 feet up at which, if you built an anchor next to the crack, you'd get a "new" moderate free pitch. Does that make Index a better place to climb? Or does that accelerate the transformation of Index into the Exit 38 of US 2 ? complete bullshit retoric. just pull the anchor, step up and send or go home and eat wheaties. course, who is to say what is a "pitch"... how long of a rope constitutes one rope length up and anchor me here so to speak....natural features or where billyboy and marysue decide to leave permanent anchor???? bolting next to cracks of any size is gay anyways......perhaps lower down anchor needs to be relocated. "Step up and eat you wheaties!" ? Come on - that's just as worthless a comment as above. That would be fine to say to someone who was whining about an old school run-out slab or some beautiful 10a crack that had an 11c start to it - don't mess with what's already established. While this philosophy does not always hold true, for the most part, precedent (in this case a set of mid anchors that's been there for quite some time) is something to be respected, if for nothing else than to maintain some sort of harmony. I've heard people complain about them in the past but NO ONE was that worked up about it (unlike centerfold again). Unless a huge problem for the neighborhood - Climbers need to learn to let sleeping dogs lie. Those mid anchors: 1) Have been established for years. 2) Rarely effect those wanting to do the FULL P1 3) ARE in a natural location 4)Never got many worked up until chain went missing. Once again - CC.com proves not to be a compass of the climbing community but a bar table... Thanks for contributing....to the chain of worthless comments. I thought the anchor was really stupid from the moment I saw it and I've never changed my mind. NOW is an appropriate time to discuss whether or not effort should be made to restore an anchor IN THE MIDDLE OF A PITCH RIGHT NEXT TO A CRACK, for crying out loud. You can argue something to the effect that "since it survived this long, it is appropriate"....but if you think about it, that argument is similarly hollow to cranial cavities of those who think this anchor is a good idea.

Ever seen the Crying Game?

Dude, even "Roj" appreciates the Pope-n-Dwayner plop pad once in a while.

Bet you can't guess where it's hiding!

Don't play that game, for every moderate you name I can name twice or three times as many hard routes. Besides, there are not many more moderates than you listed above. Sure, but for every hard route you can name (and who can't?), you can probably find a point 40 feet up at which, if you built an anchor next to the crack, you'd get a "new" moderate free pitch. Does that make Index a better place to climb? Or does that accelerate the transformation of Index into the Exit 38 of US 2 ?

Run over the Narrows Bridge and then to the Tides Tavern. Get tanked, run back.

Right. Isn't this the latest iteration? Reading this post, it seems YOU are the one in attack mode.

Couple more bolts next to that crack and we'll have to rename this climb: The Lime Lizard

No they don't. Not when easy gear is available. Nobody has the right to bolt that kind of climbing. Oh, the old "evil is justified by abundant evil" argument. Come on, you're smarter than that. Frosty the Tradman, maybe you should change your last name.

Not that long. Ten years? I don't know, but I remember when they weren't there. I also remember climbing the pitch and being puzzled why anybody would place two bolts to protect a wide crack that takes 4" gear and is only 5.10...then I realized somebody had made a "half pitch" climb that tops out at the two bolts. Now might be a good time to reconsider whether an anchor belongs there in the first place. True, one does not find a large number of 5.10 pitches at the LTW, but a little hiking will provide plenty. What's the logic in having an anchor there, half way up a superbly well-protected pitch? Should we put a bolt anchor 15 feet up Classic Crack and provide a short 5.6 pitch that ends just shy of the crux? I didn't remove the gear, but I support finishing this sanitation project.

Solvent? I'll put my boy on it.

CatBirdShite said: Ericb responds: Ericb, the parenthetical reply was priceless! Dude, I'm really embarrassed for some of the turkeys who are smugly reviewing your TR. Anybody who climbs Outerspace on a Saturday will either have to adjust to somebody's pace, gain permission to pass or just retreat. Anybody who doesn't know this is pretty damn green. Anybody who is unwilling to select one of these three options should not climb Outerspace on Saturday. Anybody who can't observe from the climb's base that such a situation is developing is a 'tard. Anybody who is stupid enough to start the climb at 9 a.m. with several parties in front, and then get on cc.com and bitch about something that is completely predictable....that is surely the behavior of a wanker. To the pretenders who offered their critical reviews, on everything from rack selection to pacing to whether Ericb and friends should have attempted this climb, I think you lack judgement, class, imagination and civility.To Ericb and party, my advice is .... I don't have any. I'm glad you had a rewarding day on the stone.

Obviously, "Beckey's Horn" would never fly, but for reasons outlined above, I think Liberty Bell is a superb candidate for renaming. Seriously.

"You know, sugar, on the internet you looked a lot like Big Lou."