Rad

or at least Uranus

Thanks. Best case is dry. Worst case is A0. In the middle is free with a little xtra adrenaline like when pi DHLA is wet, which it often is. I feel confident the goodness above it will be dry

I've only been on it in the summer. Any comment on whether it is likely to be wet the day after some showers and rain? thanks.

Yes, but we're not telling you what they're rated

I don't understand the fuss about ratings. If a climb is great does it matter if one book calls it 10d and another 11a? Or if one person's TR calls it 11- and someone else 10c? The climb is what it is. Ratings are subjective. As long as they are within a letter grade or two of the consensus then any would be suitors have some approximation of what they might expect. In this day of videos and endless internet beta, it is sometimes really fun to go climb something where you have no idea what it's rated. You stand at the base with your partner and say, "yeah, that looks fun and doable with solid gear, let's give it a go". Then one can be free of preconceptions of "this will be a total cruise" or "no way I can free that route" both of which detract from one's ability to be positive, focused, and climbing at one's best.

summit, newsflash: the internet records all of your annoying gadfly tactics for the whole world to see for all eternity. Avatar anonymity is a sham as anyone with half a brain will eventually connect you to you. Try sharing some positive energy here and you may find partners and friends. Or you can just keep digging your hole deeper and end up a grouchy old geezer who hates bolts. Golden rule... cheers, Radrigo

Heart of the Country has a 10a hands section and an 11b crack, if I recall correctly.

In the 10+ to easy 11 range you might try Cunning Stunt, Tunnel Vision, Angora Grotto, Leave My Face Alone, and Heaven's Gate. Others I haven't done but want to are Kite Flying Blind, Hairway to Stephen and Golden Road. They're safe so go for it!

Want to learn about investment? Read thirty years of shareholder reports for Berkshire Hathaway written by Warren Buffet. Not only does he know how to invest better than anyone on the planet, but he's a great and funny writer to boot.

There will be plenty of great climbing to be had. Shoot me a pm when you get back, Tim, and let's go climb something.

chicken heads rock, but that middle one is not perky enough to keep anything on board.

Weather in your window will determine your options so while researching is good, make sure you have options in different places (e.g. Rainier or Forbidden area if weather is good or Enchantments or even farther afield if weather is poor in Western WA.

Nope, but I've seen lots of leaf cutter ant colonies. They are really cool too. BTW, one defn of civilization is division of labor - and ants qualify! But humans are still better because we have middle managers, and even micromanagers...

"Freedom's just another word for nothin' left to do, Nothing ain't worth nothin', but it's free."

Thank you for the work!

Great. When I put up a new route I'll make sure to use 1/4 steel that rusts away within a couple of years. That way people can get really scared on stuff that was safe on the FA.

yep...that old aluminum hanger is just like the one used by the FA!! , likewise them bomber 1/4"-ers!!!!! Same as the day they were put in, i tell ya! keepin' it real... This sums it up for me too. I've clipped bolts in Yosemite and Pinnacles and many other places that might have been safe and solid when they went in but are garbage now. Reputable areas and organizations, including Yosemite and the Access Fund, support upgrading crappy hardware to make it safe. The focus is usually on anchors, but the same logic applies to bolts. Perhaps not to pins. That said, I too enjoy seeing and clipping old gear. It's part of the magic of experiencing older lines, so I would hope hardware is only replaced when absolutely necessary (i.e. failure is imminent). Finally, this is an issue for the Castle climbing community to decide, not the interweb SWAT team.

Here's a good article he wrote on the subject: http://www.mountaineers.org/nwmj/08/081_Pantilat.html

This kid is fun to watch. Moves much better than Sharma did at this age.

I guess the lesson is WEAR YOUR HELMET because this is not a steep climb.

If you never fall you're not going to improve, no matter what grade you are climbing now. If you only wear a helmet when you plan to fall then you WILL fall. You've set yourself up for it. Motivation is strongest when the chances of success are close to 50/50. The most satisfying leads for me are ones where it felt like I was going to fall and then somehow I kept it in control and pulled it off. Sure, being in a great setting with great partners is wonderful, but to get that heightened awareness I need to be at or near the edge of my abilities. Difficulty doesn't matter in that regard, which is why I can be as excited reading someone's 5.8 TR as someone else's 5.12 TR. It's about adventure, which means the unknown. Try it. You might like it.

cc.com needs an autobot to search and destroy any threads with "infinite bliss" in the title.

First, I send positive healing energies to Paul and his family. Accidents happen to good people, and we all wish you a full recovery. Speculating about things that might or might not have happened is not very useful. But we can look forward and think about the risks we take. I beg to differ. A difficult route is more likely to see a fall. A fall is more likely to result in an injury. And a helmet is more likely to prevent a brain injury. Make sense? Sounds like non-climber logic, but I don't want to trash your post without explanation. I think we can all agree that if you hit your head you're far better off having a helmet versus not having one. The question, then, is whether hard climbs are more likely to result in head impacts/injuries than easier ones. Let's make a few assumptions to start (feel free to dispute these if you wish): A - Steeper climbs are generally harder than lower angle climbs in the same area/style. B - One generally finds a higher ratio of experienced/inexperienced climbers on harder routes than on easier routes. C - Less experienced climbers are more likely to make mistakes than experienced climbers (perhaps the weakest of these three assumptions). Then, consider how these factors affect the most common head impact/injury situations: 1 - A falling object hits your head. The object might be a rock dislodged by a climber, a rock or other item falling for unknown reasons, or an item dropped by someone above you. This mainly applies in the mountains and on multipitch routes, but it can happen on single pitch routes as well. On steeper terrain (aka harder routes), falling objects are more likely to bounce away from the climber (belayers note that you are in the line of fire too). Also, less experienced climbers are probably more likely to drop or dislodge things onto people below them, and less experienced climbers are more prevalent on easier routes. For both of these reasons, harder/steeper routes are safer than easier routes. 2 - The climber falls and somehow flips, tumbles, spins, or pendulums and hits their head. Everyone is going to fall if they are pushing their limits, and everyone has different limits, so the suggestion that people fall more on hard routes is a fallacy. If anything, more people try the easier routes so more fall on them. Recall that it's not the fall that hurts you, it's the sudden stop at the end of it that causes damage. With that in mind, let's pose a few questions: Who is less likely to put their leg behind the rope, flip in a fall, and hit their head: the fledgling 5.9 leader who has done little outdoor leading or someone who has climbed and fallen on lead outdoors many times over many years? The experienced leader is probably safer. Who is more likely to be cognizant of unavoidable risks in climbs (moves away from corners, runout sections, mediocre pro) and be able to back off or keep it together mentally to fight through or fall safely? Again, the more experienced climber is probably safer. Whose trad protection is less likely to fail in a fall because it was improperly placed/clipped? Once again, the experienced climber should be safer. Since there is a higher proportion of experienced climbers on harder routes compared with easier routes, the harder routes should be safer. But what about the climbs themselves? Assuming protection is adequate and belayers do their jobs properly, climbers are least likely to have nasty impacts on overhanging routes, less likely to have impacts on vertical routes, and most likely to have nasty impacts on routes with ledges or big protruding features (easier routes). Thus harder routes are generally safer than easier routes. In case you need a baseball bat summary, two factors make harder routes safer than easier routes: the higher proportion of experienced climbers on them AND their steeper nature. Of course, we can always come up with exceptions. Experienced climbers make mistakes too. Steep routes can be dangerous, particularly if protection is bad. Heck, climbing is dangerous. If you want zero risk stay home and watch TV.

I'll echo the don't burn bridges comment. Same is true in any part of life. You never know who'll turn up as your boss or dating your boss or working next door. Also, if you feel the need to take time off just tell your boss. They may allow you to work remotely part time and would probably appreciate the notice to hire someone else. Maybe you can stay and train that person too. Leaving on a positive note is good, especially if you think this employer would be a good reference later.