Peter_Puget

Yikes go on a trip come back and nothing has changed. Same bullshit N & S makes a positive post regarding people/groups stepping up and contributing to their local area(s) and immediately the BS posts start coming and the thread diverted. Last time I posted Forrest claimed (incorrectly) that I inserted this issue at every opportunity. Glad to be able now to show him corroborative evidence showing his error. The first reply by TG was just a smart ass interjection of the bolting issue. Rafael replies ok then list them specifically asking that Vantage be left out. Will “shove a bolt up your ass” Strickland then spews unrelated BS. (Note his moniker comes from his previous well elucidated response regarding how to place a bolt.) After several rational posts ScottP wins the prize by coming up with the first real one for the list. Here’s a toast to Scott. Cavey’s additon comes next. Maybe it’s good maybe it’s not. Rafael seemed to be asking for routes actually climbed without fixed gear. Has this one? (Aside to CC: What do you think of the bolted lieback variation pitch on Grand Wall? And where does it look like a bolt might get cut on GMD?) Tex then adds another BS post to this thread. Next comes a series of clarifications and then Retro gets “permission” to add his list of Vantage routes. Cavey then adds the weird bolting at Little Si. Then come a couple of posts about the ASCA. So here’s a recap: Ignoring the Vantage area we have a grand total of four routes: Little Si (About 100 routes) R & A You Get What You Deserve Index (About 500 routes) Gorilla My Dreams Leavenworth (500 routes?) Arete Route SUPER RECAP = 4 routes out of 1,100. So if we ignore Si and Vantage and concentrate only on the “traditional” areas it’s only 2 out of 1,000 routes? Doesn’t seem like it is a out of control situation at these areas at all. Issues regarding replacements of specific bolts aside, I think that in general we should all encourage the replacement of old bolts/fixed gear.

I agree with you that bolting debate gets tedious. Mostly its tedious because its not an honest one. I think if you looked thru my posts you will see that I usually am responding to the issue once it has been brought up not the instigator. I also agree with you that there are hidden motivations on the part of many of the anti bolters. In fact I have not really been arguing the bolt issue so much as arguing that there is really no debate merely insult. It isnt just age that create "trads" however since I have been climbing more years than many of the posters here have been alive. Climbing is resplendent in its divergence. Instead of saying something is "boring" engage in a discussion - I think your implication was non existent but it would have been a welcome additon to the discussion had it been stated.

Forrest - The initial post in the thread was about sport climbers being “dissed.” The next two posts slammed bolting. I suggested in my post that the bolting thing is a cover for something else. (Snippet from my post: “In earlier posts I have suggested that in fact the bolting debate is often the cover for some deeper motivation. Look at the personal nature of the replies to your post. I’ll let you decide for yourself.”) You suggested two other non-bolt related factors as the motivating factor - in essence concurring with my statement. I asked my three questions with the certain knowledge that I would receive few if any replies. This issue is far from dead. Bringing up bolting was certainly not tangential to this issue. I though before I defined myself as either a “trad” or “sport” climber I ought to know what exactly I am talking about.

Dru - I think the idea of no consequences is a tough ideal to reach. I once heard a climber exclaim that a fall was "no problem." The very next fall he broke his leg. I think climbing is inherently dangerous. But I do agree that one of the goals of sport climbing is to limit danger.

Dru - I think the idea of

I am inclined to agree with you with a reservation - not sure what safely means? I do know someone who took a huge fall on the Bachar Yerian and was unhurt? And I have heard othe rothers doing the same yet I am not convinced it is a sport route. I know two people who have been hurt on the same route at Smith yet I am convinced it is a sport route! I think route finding is a critical issue. Usually I think of route finding being a non issue on sport routes. Thats why I consider Swim basically a sport route. I have been on many a Meadows route only to find myself 20' or 30' off to the side of a bolt. On those routes route finding is important despite fixed pro.

I must say I am a bit let down wrote that elevator ride to Starbucks back to the puter and I only hooked two fish! But I did get a hook rare Canadian!

Just seems like sport climbers here get called all sorts of names. Bolters get slammed and yet nobody has any clear idea of what they are talking about. And most responses are logically inane and contradictory. I would like just one person slamming sport climbing or bolting to write their reasoning in an honest attempt at being cogent and logical. Retro won't even respond to my questions shown above. and yet takes it upon himself to be a rock policeman. Its all a show. I have done Swim and except for the one pitch needing pro I'd say yep it be a sport route. This year I have also removed about ten bolts from the rock that I felt were inappropriately placed. I didn't smash hangers, insult clases of peoples or brag online but I did talk to the guys who placed them.

Nope just trying to figure out what you guys really think.

Bonco - What if the bolt protected section was continuous and located at either the begining or end of the climb? Would it still be proper (using logic that is) to use your definition?

Bronco - Thanks for the help! So do you think that any route that uses only bolts for pro is a sport climb?

Well I guess not because one pitch isnt fixed. But assunming it was fixed would you say it was a sport route? What about the other bolted lines on the Upper Wall.

Not sure where I heard that. If I can remember I'll let you know. I have always been just driving thru Canmore area so never climbed the long sport routes myself but have bouldered and scoped out lots of stuff by that lake.

That area just amazes me! It has so much rock. BTW germane to this thread didn't a pair of climbers fall to the ground off of one of those long "sport" routes?

Dru - Haven't been to Canmore area for 5/6 years. Do you go there much?

Forrest – Since the bolting question has been killed would you please provide the definitive answers to my three questions? I must have missed them while the debate raged!

Here’s another question: When does sport climbing become trad climbing? Lets start off with Bachar-Yerian. Now I am guessing that that is not a sport route. But using Cavey’s example Violent Phlegms is considered a sport route.. What’s the critical difference? Is it the distance between bolts? Is it the chance of getting hurt? Is it rap vs. on lead placement of bolts? What would be a set of distinctions I could use to differentiate the two? After I get a clear understanding of the difference my question is:Why are bolts placed on sport routes less sinful than those placed on “trad” routes?

Mystic – Ah you’ve hit the mother lode here. I would ask you to go back and review the various threads in which criticisms were made about bolts and sport climbers. Note in particular my criticism of Dwayner/Donna Two Step’s misrepresentation of facts. You will find they are an ever shifting confused batch of invective designed to insult and intimidate not persuade. Look how they speak in generalities and never specifics. Look how they shift the debate to side issues and personal attacks. In earlier posts I have suggested that in fact the bolting debate is often the cover for some deeper motivation. Look at the personal nature of the replies to your post. I’ll let you decide for yourself. So now in a serious and friendly outreach I ask the following questions: 1. Is bolting always bad? 2. Since all human action at the crags results in an impact on the environment how are we to determine what impact is immoral? 3. Are there objective standards that we can use to guide our actions?

I agree with all those suggesting a 60m rope. I prefer dry ropes although I am not sure for simple rock climbing that it makes much difference. Since you are starting out I would suggest a thicker rope. But more importantly ask around for specific recomendations for hard wearing sheaths as different brands have different wear characteristics. This is important because easier trad routes tend to follow less of a plumb line than harder route or sport routes and until you learn how to protect routes you will most certainly create some rope drag messes which will be very hard on ropes. Top ropeing too can be very hard on ropes.

Just to clarify things I am an effete wimp. The only thing big on me is my tummy

"This has degenerated into an attack on people that are not here to defend themselves" If I slandered anyone in this thread I apologize and also ask to be shown where I did so.

Not suure when I tried reading your mind. I am not advocating for or against any set of facts. In fact earlier I even stated that maybe Erik should clarify some points. What I have suggested is a reason for animosity.

Excerpt from threads posted 5/8/01 W: So what's with the vitriol? Cavey: It's the nature of the spray man. Your’e right Cavey; however, most often as you stated in the excerpt pasted above it is not. It almost always is immature and generates bad feelings for this site. Too much of the spray is simply insulting rantings.

Capt. - Reread my posts and you'll see where the anomosity comes from. Rather than defensively reacting step back and think about how posts here can be interpreted esp given how rankled you have become over this series of posts. Spray, Slander, Insults they are all the same!

Capt. - To be clear I am saying nothing about Erik personally but rather addressing the potential/probable/actual rejoinder generated by the posts on this website. BTW seems Viktor remembers things somewhat differently. I think Erik should offer a fuller explanation of his post.