JayB

Thanks for the invitation and the encouragement. I would but per Scottish Wanker's too-close-to-home profile of the American climber I am getting my psyche together and doing some tai-chi to center myself in preparation for my quest to add a sit start variation to Dreamer tomorrow, and the humiliation that would surely come along with failing to display the requisite proficiency with the chat function would like, totally harsh on my psych. [ 09-01-2002, 08:16 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

I gave it my all but got lost in a dense thicket of Javascript prompts...Anyone got a manual for this thing?

Dont forget the one about whether "diss" will endure in our language or pass into oblivion as just another "temporal lexical marker." and join far-out and groovy on the linguistic slag-heap. That post was dope.

Other news development... Didn't Tommy Caldwell recently climb the Salathe, top to bottom, no falls in a single day, without part of his index finger? The new 5.13c trad-route on the Diamond wasn't bad either. Seems like anyone who has the talent to climb those 5.14c sport-routes can turn themselves into pretty fair trad leaders if they put their minds to it...

quote: Originally posted by pope: Until you lead Thin Fingers with a rack of hexes, you're still a bolt-clipping dweeb. Well - what can I say. Thanks for sharing. The first-hand information about the swami-era was actually kind of interesting. As far as negative comments about sport-climbers in general and myself in particular are concerned, they've been repeated so often that they have not only lost much of their original ability to annoy, they've almost become endearing over time. Keep it coming. As far as thin fingers is concerned, a hex-only lead of that particular crack is certainly a bold feat. Hats-off to you if you've lead the crack in that fashion. I'm really not up to that myself, but if there's any chance that I could distinguish myself with the first documented cam-only ascent I'll definitely give that a shot in the next 12 months or so, provided I remember to bring my harness... [ 09-01-2002, 06:55 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

Well, not really. But I did spend a day out at Index tied in with a swami and some sewn-runner leg loops after forgetting my harness. Thankfully I only took a couple of very-minor lead falls and I was happily surprised that those weren't especially painfull. However, hanging from the anchors while preparing to rap down had me groaning like a woman in labor after el-swami slid over my hips and right onto my kidneys. I fully expected to be pissing blood by the time I got down. Anyhow - just wondering if any of you folks who came of age in the swami-belt era had taken any good falls on those things and been able to continue climbing wihout installing a spare kidney or two. Also - anyone out there hold onto the swami well into the age of the sewn harness? That'd be hard-core indeed. I'd have traded the rights to my first child for a sewn harness the moment they came out, ditto for cams.

Hey - thanks for looking Alex. Looking forward to the updated information as well. I searched a bit and found the original link, so here it is for those interested.... http://www.cascadeclimbers.com/iceinwashington.htm

Is that guidebook still available online? I printed out a copy at work while living in CO but lost it in the move. I'd love to have it handy when things get cold...

Niiiice. This baby's a close second to the "Sauna Sausage" T.R.

Big thumbs up to the guys who are putting this guide together, and another dissenting opinion with respect to crowding. Information about obscure areas could well have the effect of dispersing crowds amongst a greater number of areas, rather than leaving them to pack into the limited number of well known venues. If climbers in this state are desperate enough to fight over that flow at Alpental, a guide to other resources can only help... [ 08-30-2002, 08:06 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

Pretty Funny even though I resemble the cytomax swiller getting all synched up on Mt. Karma far more than the old-school Scottish fellow. You'll have to strap on the oilskin and the wool-knickers, grab the Terrordactyl, chop-steps up the flanks of one of the local peaks and submit your own TR in full Scottish style. [ 08-27-2002, 08:30 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

quote: Originally posted by MysticNacho: Too many bolts? Yes indeedy. Any examples of a climbing area where this actually happened? That is, can you actually find an account of a real climbing area where the simple presence of bolts in rock, rather than the overall impact on the surrounding landscape, resulted in closure? I've never, ever heard of any such thing happening in the real world, but would certainly be interested in hearing about such a case if you can find one.

From what I've read it was the other way around, e.g that it was the concern over the destruction of ancient rock art by climbers that prompted the closure. There were lots of boulder problems in close proximity to, if not right on top of petroglyphs. Were there any bolted routes that imperilled rock are sites? If there were then they certainly fit into a pattern of behavior that resulted in restricted access, but hardly think that they qualify as the number one problem on their own. As far as bolting is concerned, I do recall reading something to the effect that it was illegal to install bolts in the rock, but not to climb bolted routes, so some climbers took to installing bolts at night against the wishes of the land-managers, which in turn resulted in an ever worsening relationship with the land managers? Again, it seems to come down to the behavior of the climbers installing the bolts, rather than the bolts themselves that lead to problems. Installing bolts that clearly violate regulations in sensitive areas or against the expressed wishes of the land managers is one thing, establishing reasonably bolted lines in areas where the authorities have either condoned it, or at least not forbidden it, is another matter entirely. [ 08-27-2002, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

I think I'm with you there PP, but (for me) the issues surrounding retrobolting existing lines and/or bolting are separate from the issues under discussion at the moment. I was just looking for an argument to suport the assertions that leading sport routes is as safe as toproping them, and that the presence of sport climbing in any given area automatically raises the spectre of restricted access. I just used Yosemite and the areas to make the case that in practice, it just hasn't been true that the mere existence of reasonably bolted routes = overpopularity = restricted access. Smith has plenty of bolts, gets a staggering amount of climber attention, and yet there's no access problem that I'm aware of. Heuco Tanks had very few bolts relative to all of the climbing, yet climber access there has been severely curtailed. It's all about managing climber impact, which includes a sensible attitude towards bolting. What "sensible" means in practice is different for each area, but for the most part clmbers seem to have gotten it right eventually. [ 08-27-2002, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

I can see circumstances under which a proliferation of bolts renders a lead no more bold than a toprope, but never less bold than a toprope. I just don't see how that's possible, but I'm willing to listen... Maybe "Clip-em or Skip-em" at Vantage and a few at Exit 38 that I've seen are bolted in such a fashion, but from my perspective routes bolted so thoroughly that the leader sustains at little more risk during the climb than the follower are the exception rather than the rule. I still don't see an argument that would persuade anyone to believe that in general, leading a sport route is no more risky than toproping it. Maybe if you use a #4 stopper as a TR anchor with a static rope or something, but then the argument should be "Toproping a sport route protected only by a woefully inadequate anchor involves more risk than leading it." It that was your claim, I'd have to agree with you - but that of course is not what you've been claiming. Also, with respect to the statement: "The truth of the assertion depends on the absurdity to which the route is overbolted." Does this statement represent the extent of your argument on behalf of the assertion that leading sport routes and top-roping them are equally risky activities? [ 08-27-2002, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

quote: Originally posted by pope: Too many bolts constitute a mess. Too many trails constitute a mess. Too many bolts attract too many climbers, resulting in too many trails and other trash. If you're a rap bolter, build a little adventure into your route. Better yet, drill it on the lead. Bold routes with sparse bolts diminish the popularity/crowding problems which ultimately deny access. If there's quality rock, climbers follow. Yosemite, the Gunks, and Eldo are hardly sport mecca's, and they aren't exactly being ignored by climbers. The key to keeping resources open to climbers is not limiting climber interest, but rather developing sensible policies that mitigate the impact that climbers have on both the rock and the surrounding landscape.

quote: Originally posted by pope:

The "Four Rock Classic" on the southeast side is pretty sweet, as are the many variations on that line that incorporate most of the same holds....

quote: Originally posted by chucK: Ludicrous! Why should this be a yardstick? What is so special about climbing? How about "imagine yourself trying to do the hardest math test they're capable of acing?" How about "imagine yourself trying to build the Lego creation that person has done". Chuck - I certainly wasn't taking a stand for the right to say something stupid or offensive without rebuke. Different topic entirely, sorry If I didn't make that clear in my post. As far as the legos examples of legos and mathematics are concerned, that too is something entirely different. Expertise in a given field certainly does not entitle one to immunity from criticism in all other endeavors oneself, nor does it give one the right to critise everyone else whose attainments in their own field don't quite measure up to your own accomplishments in say, competitive lego events. If, however, you are involved in competitive lego building yourself and are about to make demeaning comments to a fellow lego enthusiast about his prowress with the said legos, you should, I think, take your own lego building accomplishments into account before opening your mouth. That's all.

quote: Originally posted by Dru: JayB if I could respectively disagree for a minnit here, I dont belive you have to climb at a certain grade to criticize ethics. For instance, I can say chipping holds on a blank wall to make a 5.14 is unethical and that the chipped holds should be "repaired" with cement or whatever, even if I'm only a 5.7 climber. The principle of the thing is the same no matter what grade you climb at. Same goes with criticizing bolts being placed next to usable gear placements, the principle is the same no matter if its a 5.7 or 5.14 gear route being retrobolted. Dru: You're absolutely right if what we're talking about is ethics. Although the absence of caffeine in my veins probably made my post a bit more vague and rambling than it had to be, the only ethics I meant to touch on were the "ethics" of talking smack about one's fellow climbers. I think ethics is the wrong word to describe the phenomenon, but I've just never been able to figure out the folks who think the fact that they refrain from sport climbing entitles them to belittle the folks that do, without taking the full scope of their respective abilities into account. I just brought up the case of Lambone and the folks who attack him as perhaps the most glaring example of this phenomenon. It's a species of BS that I've never encountered outside of this board, and I figured that it was high time someone called it for what it is.

I second, or third, or whatever the motion. One of the best entries on the subject I've ever seen.

quote: Originally posted by chucK: Remember our dear departed CrazyPolishBob? He was an obnoxious prick but he claimed to climb 5.13's or something. According to your standards noone here could flame him (or 86 him). Chuck - That, I have to admit, is one badass lego creation. Also, since you did me a favor and took the time to point out a couple of elements within my post that I either didn't explain very well, or could be easily misconstrued I'll return to your post once more. Hopefully I'll do a better job explaining myself this (last)time. AS far as CPB is concerned, I wasn't suggesting that anyone should refrain from commenting on his etiquette, his spelling, his hair, his taste in sushi, or anything else simply because he reputedly climbs some seriously hard shit. What I was trying to say though, is that in my opinion no one has any business calling the guy a weak-ass climber unless their own abilities and accomplishments as a climber exceed CPB's. Walk the walk before you talk the talk. It's an old cliche', and consequently not a very new idea. It's also one that might just improve the tone of the discussion around here from time to time, or at least I think so. That's all. [ 08-21-2002, 01:31 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

quote: Originally posted by Peter Puget: Some time ago JayB suggested that perhaps you didn’t climb hard and that may be influencing your viewpoint While I normally come down squarely on PP's side on these things, I should clarify my old point a bit. I believe this was in a thread where I got annoyed by Dwayner's comments about bouldering, and suggested that if he attempted anything at half the grade that the guys featured in the story were sending, he'd probably be better able to appreciate the power and skill involved at leading edge bouldering. He replied with something to the effect that boulering just wasn't his deal and he could rip on it all he wanted without ever becoming proficient at it, for aesthetic reasons if nothing else, and that's where we left it. While it may have come off otherwise, my intent was not to suggest that he did not or could not climb hard, because until now I didn't have any idea what he had climbed, and there was a strong chance that his burliest trad leads were quite a bit tougher than mine - though that's hardly an exclusive club. Anyone who has lead 5.12 trad is, in my opinion, one bad mofo. Maybe it's just the "new school" in me , but I've always thought that a sense of shame or a desire to avert embarassment, if nothing else, should keep you from talking shit about someone who is better than you at whatever it is you're discussing. So if we're talking about bouldering and the hardest boulder problem you have completed, or were capable of completing at the moment, is a V1 you'd really have no business talking smack about Fred Nicole. Same goes for trad, alpine, ice, or any other sub-discipline of climbing that you particpate in. :Warning - rant that follows really doesn't have much to do with content of this thread, and isn't directed at any particular person - just a phenomenon I've noticed. Read on if bored or incarcerated: I suppose that's one of the things that I've never understood about some of the spray(ers) on this site. Take a guy like Lambone for instance (though it could be anyone who gets out on hard stuff) - does grade V free routes, big aid routes like The Shield, long alpine routes, leads WI-*$#ing-5, etc - yet there are people out there who think that the fact that they have some business calling this guy a pussy because he clips bolts and they don't, regardless of what grade they lead at the trad-crags. Amazing. This despite the fact that I'd be willing to bet that 98% of the folks that chime in about sport climbing as the definitive route to wussdom would likely be shut down in a massive way - think not even making it to the first bolt - trying to follow his hardest sport leads - and let's not even talk about the WI5 stuff. I suspect it's just the anonymity of the internet at work once again. It's been said before that the tone on this board would be much less harsh if people pretended that they were talking face to face, rather than over an anonymous medium. I agree with that and have tried to live the credo, though I suppose we all fall short at times. I have another one to add - before making negative comments about one of your fellow climbers, imagine yourself at the base of the hardest route they're capable of leading at the moment - with an audience. The rack is in your hands and it's your lead. Still feel like talking? If not, maybe consider easing up on the spray a bit. Just a thought....

The Eastlake Zoo would be dope...

Very cool outing indeed! I'd be into heading out there again in September to finish up the road and the bolts on American Pie. Also, thanks to Mattp and Bchaps for sharing the photos, and to Darryl for the cold beverages back at the cars - and of course to the dudes who had the vision to establish the routes in the first place and heuvos necessary to install all of those bolts on lead [ 08-19-2002, 04:22 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]