mattp

It is commonly suggested that our litigious society rewards greedy trial lawyers and discourages personal responsibility, and some of the commentary here seems to reflect that view (russki stated this outright, but I believe this view underlies some of the other comments). While I cannot argue with the idea that a plaintiff's attorney who hopes to take a third of a large award may be rewarded for filing suit in a case where most of us would believe his or her own client should bear the brunt of the blame, but overlooked is the fact that if the ladies and gentlemen of the jury share this view (that the client was to blame or otherwise does not deserve compensation), the plaintiff's attorney is not going to receive his or her fee. And I should point out that our civil system not only seeks to punish the irresponsibile (e.g. McDonalds who serves coffee so hot that they know it will burn somebody or the drunk driver who kills an innocent child) but also to redistribute the loss (the lost income and enjoyment of life suffered by the injured party is quantified and this amount is paid by the irresponsible party). Everybody hates trial lawyers until they or their family member gets hurt. Then they hate the fact that the trial lawyer wants to be paid, and they expect that the lawyer can front the costs of pursuing a lawsuit (in some cases tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars) without the prospect of a large monetary reward. In the case of mountain climbing, I would venture a guess that the trundler or the irresponsible bumbler who falls and injures another person is not likely to be sued over those injuries unless it was a truly outrageous accident because the natural defense to such a suit is that the injured party was engaging in a dangerous activity wherein rockfall triggered by another party or the active falling of another party can and should be anticipated. But what if a guy was to go to the top of the Sunshine Wall, on a Saturday in the Spring, and started trundling boulders without looking to see if there were parties below? Shouldn't that person be held responsible if in so doing, that person accidentally injured somebody? What if the injured person was not going to be able to work again -- should they be condemned to live on social security disability for the rest of their life while the trundler goes on their merry way and keeps all of their income for the rest of their life? Our criminal laws wouldn't address this issue – a charge of wreckless endangerment or assault or something might land the trundler in jail for a few months but as far as taking care of the victim, it's a civil matter.

Equally stupid: It won't go.

quote: Originally posted by Jedi: Sounds like I should expect the unexpected and less reliable rock. Less reliable ice, too. Very often, the N. Face never really comes "in" as it new snow throughout the season. A few years ago it was skied in September, the month when most of the ice climbs along the Banff Jasper highway are thought most likely to be in their prime. But what a prize:

Check your PM's.

I like both products. I find they need to be reapplied more often than I would like, but they work.

The guy's name was Fuerentsine or something like that. The mill was in Massachusetts. I liked it when the interviewer (Bradley) asked him why he didn't just close the business and retire with all his money and he replied "what am I going to do with it all -- eat more or something?" It was a very nice story, offering a very complimentary picture of the man and of the company, and it suggested that although they are now in Chapter 11, they may pull out of it and carry on. But what about the shareholders? I don't think you can expect many companies to do what they did.

Sorry, Dru. There is a Ptarmigan Ridge on Rainier, but also on Baker. As far as I know, there is no Park Glacier on Mt. Rainier. The Park Glacier headwall, complete with schrund, can offer an actual ice climb in September/October and it is kind of cool because it tops out right on the summit or very shortly below the summit on the Cockscomb Ridge.

The ballroom has been friendly and the terrace is pleasant, so you won't get a no vote from me. But there has been at least one request for a downtown location and perhaps Parker wants to attend via speedboat again -- if so, I bet he doesn't want to mess with the locks.

Jedi - I have not been there, so I can only speculate. However, do not not underestimate the Canadian Rockies -- especially Mount Robson. If you have not climbed in the range before, the crumbly rock is probably entirely unlike anything you have ever experienced and you are likely to have the sense that NOTHING can be trusted and that an entire step in the rige might fail without notice and with fatal consequences. Have you ever climbed such a thing with crampons on? Should it have snowed not to long before your climb, or should there be some verglas or something, this is also a possibility. I would guess that it is far more serious than climbing to the Prow from Camp Schurman - with more difficult climbing on rock that is harder to assess visually and more exposure. matt [ 08-12-2002, 09:10 AM: Message edited by: mattp ]

I'w with Gene. Sure, most Dragontail routes include sections of both good and bad rock, but overall these climbs are pretty good and it is the mountains. If you want perfect rock in an alpine setting, go to the Bugaboos or to the Sierra and pick your climbs VERY selectively. Short of that, you are stuck with routes that will offer plenty of opportunities to pull a rock on yourself or your partner or to throw at "the other guys" below.

Jedi- "Third to Fifth" means that different parties have had very different reactions to the rock rib, or that the author guesses that they will. On lots of alpine climbs there are sections that one party will scramble but which others will treat with belays and pro -- epecially on crumbly rock which is less than vertical. However, my recollection is that there are two alternative approaches to the N Face that do not utilize that rock rib at all, so if you are planning a trip there and you don't like the sounds of the rib you might check into these.

Monk - I was called names for suggesting that I also felt Index was rated stiffly. However, I would say roughly the same thing: more than the rating scale, it is a matter of style. At Index, the style is steep rock with crux's that tend to continue for quite a ways, and one has to hang on to crux or near-crux moves while placing pro unless they want to run it out. Climbs like Toxic Shock and Thin Fingers, with brief crux's protectable from stances and with rests in the middle of other hard sections, are the exeptions and people say they are the only "giveaway" ratings at Index.

I won't question your history there, but I think it remains true that Classic Crack is not like a straight-in crack where I routinely see sport climbers liebacking the edges. Have you tried to lieback it (to me, it seems to make the climb quite a bit harder to try to do it that way)? [ 08-09-2002, 10:09 PM: Message edited by: mattp ]

But quote: Originally posted by chucK: don't use those stupid stiffy dogbone draws. [ 08-09-2002, 06:39 PM: Message edited by: mattp ]

I think that is just called "the wrong way to do it."

Greg: "Gate Lash" is the phenomenon of the vibration cause by the rope running through a biner during a fall actually causing the gate to open. Pros of Wire Gates: lighter do not flutter (gate does not open due to vibrations during a fall) easier to clip may be safer when cross-loaded against gate other??? Cons: aggressive hook on gatestock catches on things (e.g., not as convenient for racking stoppers) more likely to unclip stoppers, nut took, other things get tangled in the wire gate when you jumble your rack belayer cannot hear the "clip" other???

quote: Originally posted by chucK: don't use those dumb stiffy dogbone draws. ChucK is like a dog with a bone on this point. Just think about "draws" and you'll get this admonishment.

Standard practice re: rapelling off a sling or a rappel ring or biner? It is largely a question of setting but also a question of one's back ground. Most climbers I know (and myself included) do not carry enough rap rings and extra biners to outfit all the rappels on a big and technical mountain descent with rings or biners, but we generally carry extra slingage to replace worn webbings or establish new anchors where necessary. Some climbers do not give it a second thought, whereas I've had some partners who are so obsessed with the danger of rope slippage sawing the anchor that they will leave their brand new $20 locking biner behind if necessary. On populr crags, a quick link or two saves everybody the worry and the need to re-feed the slings every other day, and they will make all the guys who adhere to the "tech tips" or Freedom of the Hills much more comfortable.

Anybody who is bored at work ever climbed Agnes? It was VERY imipressive when I viewed it from the air a couple of years ago.

And enjoy. I don't think there is a better 5.6 than Midway, or a better 5.8 than Canary, on any crag in Washington. In my view, Outer Space is slightly over rated, but those last 2 1/2 pitches are certainly some of the more spectacular around and well worth the effort required to get there.

Dale - Would that be in the green volume of the Cascade Alpine Guide? Fred is working on a revision of that volume right now and would probably appreciate your input. Wait a couple of weeks so he can clear his e-mail when he gets back from that trip to the Rockies and send him your comments at that address given in the link on the front page of cc.com.

Lest somebody hastily point out that just a few short months ago I was arguing that the climbs in Leavenworth are rated stiffly, I should add that I believe it is true that some of them are. But the real distinction, I believe, is the climbing style. Take Classic Crack, for example: it has solid hand and foot jams so it is rated 5.8, but the jams are deep inside a crack with rounded outside edges so you can't cheat it by lying back or face climbing the edges of the crack. For someone who isn't fluid with crack climbing, it seems a lot harder than 5.8. Or Canary: I doubt there is a move harder than 5.8 on it but it is overall a hell of a lot more insecure than some 5.8 at Vantage where you get postive holds, stemming rests, and perfect pro every step of the way.

I don't think very many of the routes are sandbagged so much as they involve a style of climbing different from what you experience in most sport climbing areas, or even on more "normal" granite. There are few postive edges, even on the sides of the cracks, and many cracks are dis-continuous, flared, or shallow. Also, many of the older climbs were developed in an era where bolting was practiced with greater restraint, so you will find them protectable but not necessarily easy to protect (as in the start of Canary, discussed above).

Your rope will be fine. Dru may be right that it is specifically designed for a more limited range of applications, but my guess is that (1) your rope is strong enough for glacier travel and for belaying low-angled rock, (2) it will stretch more than a fatter rope but this will be more of an inconvenience than a hazard, and (3) it is light enough that you will be less likely to leave it behind than you might with a heavier rope (thus it may in fact be SAFER then other alternatives).

Mitch, I would agree with you but to be fair I think it should be noted that the placements are not totally straight forward stuff-the-cam type spots.