JosephH

Steering left as you got higher is what it looked like at the time to me as well...

Good one Ivan. I've been so out of it all my fingertips are now peeling off as they've forgotten about climbing. That's the crack off of the left side LoLP I tried to free two years ago and was stymied by a bush in the top of the wide. I believe the last time I checked the piece I'd left was gone, but the bush was still there. Did you guys do it in?

Only the Phantom knows...

They were designed for aid, but are beefy enough for free climbing. I took a solid thirty-footer onto a #3 in Eldo back in the day so I'm good with them. I think a lot of it all has to do with how "into pro" you are as well. I happen to find every placement a creative gift and playtime - the more technical the better at times. For me trad climbing is a matter of three questions: can I see it; can I climb it, can I protect it. I love it when there is challenge and and 'art' in all three. And I just dig it when pro gets small, technical, and demanding to the point where modding gear or variously pre-slicing screamers can make the difference between a placement holding or not. I do certainly get that some folks can view the whole pro thing as tedious or a PITA; I'm just am oddly wired such that it all really fascinates me.

Skanky, loose rock, no problem - but I'm a complete coward when it comes to snow and ice. I have to go south or just buckle down and code...

Has winter closed in on Eldo, or do I need to bug out to RR after this weekend?

I wait for you to post...

Those that can't train spray... If I could walk away from my keyboard to train I'd love it. Well, that and I don't train. ------------------------------ Bill, So I'm not supposed to respond? Hell, as it was Mark got pissed when I was slow getting back up to his. As far as "I'm right", no - I have my perspective and views on the subject other people have theirs. When I'm misquoted, someone's putting words in my mouth, or arguing points which in the end all revolve around sanitizing a spectacular and challenging line, then I suppose it does look that way. From my perspective I seem to be up against "wasted rock", "best for the community", "remove the risk climbing", and "it's too dangerous" arguments - none of which I agree with. I have read folks posts and been entirely forthright and honest in my responses. I'm really a bit stunned that not a single person voiced any excitement, interest, or even curiosity in the line as a free climb. I guess in the end, I climb what I climb because it grabs and interests me, I don't climb for other people - if what a safety-obsessed mainstream does pushes folks' view of my climbing ever farther to the fringes that entirely fine with me. But then again, needing some sketch in our climbing is probably something Ivan and I have in common.

Even though McGowen states he has the first FFA. Yes, Bob was working on it for a couple of months and I'm pretty sure we inadvertantly got on it in-between their FA and FFA dates at the end of May. We never knew about them and they never knew about us. And whether that was indeed the case or not, walking down and onsighting it in '87, makes him a comet in my book. The next day we walked to the end of the trail and I got on the line above the arena. We were and are pretty much all about roofs so those naturally caught our eyes.

If we were talking about a panel or rock with no history I'd agree it's all just a matter of subjective opinion. However, that's not the case here, there is an objective history of travel over this particular section of stone and I (and from the sound of it, Ivan) would go do it again. Also, when I say 'death hazard' I don't mean it in a someone-may-die sort or way, I mean it in a someone-is-going-to-die way - the whole someone-may-die rock I view as more optional as in then don't get on it if you can't deal. I agree there is still room for a amount of conjecture, but people who have actually closely examined the panel and climbed over it are probably in a better position to judge what's what then the average person just reading about it. And I don't get on anything like that panel without studying it extremely well before, during, and after in advance of my second following over the same terrain. Fortnuately you're in a good stance to do just that from just immediately above it when doing the climb. In the absense of any clear and concrete indication to the contrary, I'm willing to bet a lead on it being as solid as it ever was. Normally, I don't think you're really all that elitist or anything, but the implications of this statement are a little over the top. So, if someone who wants to climb windsurfer sees someone up at the pipeline anchor trying to climb this traverse, and they aren't familiar enough to know that there's a loose flake up there and they should leave, then they only have half a brain? The elitist image that you may need to fight doesn't come from your desire to preserve the rock, or to preserve adventure...it comes from your ability to talk down to or about anyone who doesn't climb as much as you at Beacon, or doesn't have your experience level with those climbs, or style of climbing. Well, given you're quoting me, if they "were concerned about it" as I said, then they'd be stupid to walk up and climb there. If anyone walked up while I was on the route and I thought they were in any danger I'd let them know what was happening and ask them to move to say FFA or wait a bit until we're done. If they were either inconsiderate or stupid enough to just pretend like nothing was happening then I'd back off as I wouldn't want to attempt a climb like that around such folks - it would blow the whole energy of the attempt. And, yet again, given the history and opportunity it presents, I'd say that's a mindlessly inconsiderate perspective particularly when it involves such a spectacular chunk of free climbing... The traditional, ever-present, and very sensible option for climbers concerned with the value of their own lives in such situations is either don't leave the belay or retreat - you'll forgive me if I find your argument here, that one should just bulldoze onward at the expense of a fine free climb, a bit troubling. I didn't, I asked that he not to go back up on it if he felt he couldn't manage it without dumping the panel.

Ha, you have me dead to rights there; sorry, I just haven't seen it when it's been on display.

when i read this it makes me think you're climbing w/ a comet I was. His first climb at Beacon was walking down the trail, stopping, looking up at Stone Rodeo and onsight sending what in all likelyhood was the FFA.

Three parties of free climbers and a few odd aider (give or take a few passings). This panel is definitely a landmark. Somebody should write up an obit. It's not a landmark - it's a possibility. You either value those or you don't...

Mark, not at all, read it again. After having watched Ivan solo the corner several times I did tell him I for one would be a lot less scared about him doing it if he weren't frenching when he was roped as he won't be able to french when soloing. And I've got no problem at all with the fact he likes aid climbing - in fact I love that he gets out and aid climbs. This is just a case where aid and free conflict on a line. I've done more then enough aid climbing to know how much control and say you have over how and in what direction you dangle and how much say you have about leaning against the rock at any given point. You're attempting to infer a whole lot I haven't said. A lot of reasons, I have tried to get on it a couple of times but Marco balked one time and another guy a different time. It's been back on my radar of late for something Shane or you, now that you're here, might be interested in - most people wouldn't be up for it and I get that The differnce is I've only trundled significant rocks that have been absolute death hazard or that are so loose there is no possibility of climbing through / over it safely. I've never in my life deliberately trundled a rock of any significance that was an essential component of a climb. ======================================= P.S. Mark, I'm not ignoring your posts at all, but I can only work and answer this many posts so fast...

Only an idiot would start that pitch from anywhere but the pipeline belay. Some rock would slough down the slope towards those climbs, the odds of any of it making it down to them airborne is slim. What if someone was in the middle of aid climbing free for some and they could not just “go elsewhere for a bit”. Well, being the elitist misanthrope I am and into crowds when I'm doing something out on the edge, I wouldn't be doing it when anyone else was around, but you're seriously kidding yourself if you think someone at the base of FFS would be in any peril from that panel dumping.

Tangen-Foster and I evaluated that for awhile before we headed up the pitch. Essentially the belayer is completely safe and the leader will likely swing free clean of the debris as they fall with it. I've had it happen before out at a route, 'To Air Is Human", that Marco and I put up out at Horsethief on a three-tiered roof at the East end of the main cliff. I pulled on the wrong little stone and the whole wall I was on came down to the tune of about a ton and a half of rock. I swung free and that's what Tangen-Foster and banked on would happen before we did it. I think it's a matter if it isn't a risk you feel you can evaluate and manage then you shouldn't take it - deliberately dumping it for the same reason just seems entirely lame to me.

Only if you belay from the pipeline anchor, what about those on the ground climbing windsurfer/riseup/free for all/free for some? They would all be a risk. In the the end of the day....if its loose and came come off with your hands......bye bye. The pipeline anchor is the belay. Yet another case of not knowing what you talking about - the panel would pose little to no threat to anyone climbing on those other routes if it came down. And if anyone turned up to climb those lines who had half a brain and was concerned about it they'd go elsewhere for a bit.

Pretty arrogant to state it will never go free without this panel. You mean you and I will never free it......I bet some strong MFer could climb it free. The entire cave needs to be RAPPED into and cleaned with a hammer. Of course, this is yet another case where you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about and the odds are real damn good you could rap hammer and bolt the shit out of it and you'd still never lay a hand on it...

Ivan, I like you and admire your spirit for getting after stuff, especially obscure stuff like this. But to be honest - and it's not like I haven't mentioned it - I'm endlessly surprised you don't put more into working on free climbing if only for the sake of your free soloing proclivities. And from what I've watched, I wouldn't characterize your climbing as 'delicate' - not an judgment statement, just what I've observed. You're entirely right - the panel could have shifted as Bill suggests over time and a butterfly landing on it could take it off - but I don't believe that's the case because I don't think it would still be up there if it was in that delicate of a condition. So when I say 'clumnsy' I mean aid climbing is inherently clumsy compared to free climbing relative to the limited options for where your hips, legs, and feet go with regard to them bearing pressure against the panel as your get past it - you just don't have a ton of options when you're in aiders, you basically hang where you hang and against what you're against. Look, if you absolutely must climb it you must climb it, if it dumps it dumps; what's especially disconcerting to me is all this completely cavalier talk of deliberately dumping a panel with it's history.

The pitch hasn't been freed, but the arching traverse has. From my earlier inspection of the panel I'm pretty damn sure it never will be if it's dumped. The point is it has been worked as a free pitch and it has been a long standing goal to get back on it. Now Ivan may want to aid those lines, but McGown aided through the panel at least twice and set the precedent for aid as well. That any of you would argue for dumping a panel with that history of ascents is simply beyond me and as I said, incredibly inconsiderate of the free climbing possibilities of the line. And for what? To jug on through and dispose of the panel as an inconvenience? Like I said, pardon me if I think that sucks in the extreme. This has nothing whatsoever with what I think of myself in relationship to Beaon - this is strictly about a single route clash of aid versus free climbing interests. And I have no interest in being any kind of 'overlord' - my sole concern and interest is that Beacon remain a trad area and that it's open every possible day it can be each year. That's where my story with Beacon begins and ends. So far those efforts have yielded a couple of extra months of climbing at Beacon over the past four years. My partner and I both examined the panel in detail when we climbed it. It is actually not at all the big mystery you folks are making it out to be - nothing is 100%, but the odds are real good it will never be free climbed again without it.

Bill, deliberately trundling a dangerous stone that poses a clear hazard on a popular route is one thing. The panel up from Pipeline is in no such location and I at least do not consider it a hazard to climb over as your belayer is entirely sheltered and the odds of being hurt by any of it as you both come off the headwall would be slim. But again, it can and has been climbed over successfully, why put that at risk...?

Mark, that panel has been traveled over by myself and my partner and by McGown & Co. at least twice - that makes six times at a minimum that the panel has been climbed (aid and free) past it without dumping it. Could just be me, but I would think that would set a precedent and standard for travel over the panel. Pardon me if if I think someone going up there and putting at risk or dumping it deliberately is uncool. There's no need for that panel to come down any other way than on its own. Hey, I can't stop anyone from climbing the line, but as I said it is a breathtaking free climb over the arch of the arena to the top of it - it's simply beyond me why anyone would jeopordize that possibility. This is the first time I've had any problems whatsoever with Ivan's aid/french proclivities, but I fail to see on what basis he feels it's fine to go up and deliberately, or through clumbsiness, ruin a spectacular and unique stretch of free climbing.

Geoff, no not at all, I was in LA for a week and then have just been working like a fiend. The "close call" was pretty straightforward and automatic as they go. I wouldn't in any way call it a non-event and it's a good thing it's a big, well-padded shelf up there. I'd like to think anyone would have responded the same, though it did get me wondering if younger folks, who for the most part typically don't have much exposure to or experience with bad or no anchors stanced belays, would know how to react or possess the same reflexes. It certainly had the potential for a bad outcome otherwise. Bad judgment on my part allowing the situation, however, but the only obvious 'canonical' anchor puts the belayer in a less then optimal position relative to the climber. It was a case where I should have gone with the anchor regardless. Again, I completely disagree - I'd say not getting on the line if you can't climb through it without screwing it up is the far better alternative. There's nothing "oh well" about the situation except that folks might take a cavalier attitude towards heading up stuff they aren't equipped to deal with other than in the crudest way and blow it for folks who can. Being one of the few who've been up on and past it I'm pretty sure the free climbing will be substantially fucked if it comes down. To be honest, I can't believe you guys are even be arguing that it's cool to just barrel on through such situation with complete disregard for the history of prior ascents by multiple parties and the reality that what's there is delicate but proven entirely workable. I find it incredibly inconsiderate at best.

Hmmm, believe it or not I missed that one as I've been coding. But it's not an altogether surprising pronouncement as it seems to me about the only explanation for the way OBL's engagements have played in the region since 9/11 and the invasions of Afganistan and Iraq. I have yet to see a sustained pattern of operations by Qaeda in Iraq that amounted to anything other than giving a pipeline of recruits experience in [temporarily] controlling local populations (a Taliban specialty) and engaging US and Iraqi troops. I suspect the focus was on Iraq only due the fact that a high-volume recruiting pipeline was far easier to pump through Syria than Pakistan. Now that he likely has a good established base groomed he's probably moving on to bigger things. If that is how it's playing out then the likely net result of the administration's wars in Iraq and Afganistan is that we just invested a trillion dollars in OBL Enterprises, Inc., Pashtun tribes, Iraqi Shiites, Taliban, and Iran. No matter how you slice or dice it - we've generated far more hardened 'terrorists' then we started with. -------------- Now that I do take a few minutes and look, here's another: Now there's some serious wishful thinking and grasping for some sort of accomplishments for an adminstration 'progress' report they've had to make public now that they've briefed Obama.

Could it also be that Iraq and Afganistan actually works to OBL's advantage in almost every way. His existing close cadre of lieutenants were all winnowed and sifted out of the ranks of folks who proved themselves fighting a superpower (the Russians) in Afganistan. What makes you think he cares about the outcomes in Iraq or Afganistan now beyond their potential for replenishing his ranks? It could just as easily be that he realizes he's fighting a new and broader asymmetric 'war' and at this point doesn't really give a rat's ass about either beyond their role as the perfect training and proving ground for a new generation of jihad fighters loyal to his broader cause. With the neocon's help he gets two different breeding grounds he can rotate his most promising recruits through giving them exposure to very different operating environments and alliances. I would suspect he runs them through the mill there and then moves them to Syria and on to the EU and Indonesia for 'cultural' training and integration testing.