Kimmo

uhh, 5.X- at most, fat guy.

wherever i've climbed, i've noticed no great difference between sport and trad "difficulty" at any given rating. in fact, at index, i can name a number of sport climbs that seem to me to be a bit harder than some trad lines at the same rating. maybe it's different where this donini fellow climbs? or maybe it's just the old skool meme about "sportos" being weak and not nearly as strong and as manly as yester-year's gangsters? and someone mentioned not caring about grades: in my twenty+ on and off years of climbing, i've never met someone who was really into climbing who didn't care about grades at all, at some point in their lives. but i certainly have met climbers who denied caring!

if i will for a moment assume to know what you are talking about in the rather vague and contorted sentence above, then it sounds like this would logically lead into the ol' "what does 'intelligence' mean" discussion . it sounds like you might assume to know already, but for me, "precise definitions" are a bit harder to come by (and certainly not indicated by the administration of an iq test). in other words, your assumption about a "precise definition" even existing (no matter what world you live in) is patently false.

dave page seems unreliable, from all the second hand info from friends. my only dealing with him showed non-existent pr skills, so even if he did good work, i'd never go there.

i'm not sure if you are posting the above as evidence of your point, or mine....

i hope you are right.

and herein lies the problem. i certainly won't feel better about the product if 5 or 10 samples are pulled at spec rating, and my point is that nobody else should either. all i see this testing doing is possibly creating a false sense of safety (if samples pass), because potentially the cause of the problem is not being remedied.

"extremely intelligent"? that's kind of a funny assertion....i guess "intelligent" can mean many different things to different people. what i always loved about hayek was his buddhist sensibility.

in other words, contributing cash to testing individual pieces is like throwing money down the drain.

the problem here is that ok you might hit good quality with the ones you test (what will your sample size be), but will that in any way attest to the quality of untested samples? there seems to be a problem with manufacturing protocols, and until that is remedied, spot testing does nothing to assure anyone about the quality of all individual pieces.

and in response to the above concerning a lower kN rating: if they had a lower rating, but an obviously flawed brazing process which accounted for this lower rating, it would be just as unacceptable as the current fiasco.

I'm a little aghast with the arguments being made regarding aliens, and the defenses being posited. Christ, we are presumably talking about people's lives being put in danger by a company producing defective products, and that company's unwillingness to provide accountability and a proper remedy. The above is another example of the ridiculous comments being offered in CCH's defense: If the brazing process is flawed, one will never know what the actual failure rating will be with any particular piece, which again makes any claim about their safety a statement about the utter ignorance of the claimant. Hopefully it will not take a death (and the following lawsuit) before this circus act comes to an end.

unless yer doing fast pull-ups on the hang-board, i don't think yer training power; sounds more like yer training strength (which i think is a great power precursor). power is work done over time, so the faster you apply x force, the more power is involved. campusing can be a good power developer, but this requires speed (a campus board can be great for developing strength; just depends on how it's used).

the idea that "climbing is the best training for climbing" can certainly be overly simplistic at best, and refuted by the performances of some of the best climbers: think gullich, simpson, moon, woods, usobiaga, bereciartu, etc etc. it helps if you like training, but i've certainly seen my own climbing (sport and bouldering) go way up from dedicated bouts of training, and much faster than when i only boulder or sport climb. i believe i just read about trotter doing nothing but fingerboarding for 4 months before sending Just Do It. something i'm diggin on lately are intervals on the campus board. right now i'm using 3/4" edges only, and laddering up what would correspond to 1 3 5, then matching and reversing back down, holding each hand position 3 seconds. total 20 seconds on, then 10 seconds off, and repeat 6 to 8 times for one set (i'm not there yet! only doing 4 or 5). i'd like to build up to 4 sets in a workout, meaning ~150 to ~200 moves at a pretty high intensity, then move to 3/8" edges and/or longer pulls like 1 4 7. i'm siked to see how old standards feel after incorporating this twice a week into my existing workout for the next 6 weeks. considering how it duplicates the burn of harder routes, i think i already know the answer though....

bump. any takers? steep sport climbs at fossil, just waiting!

i could only guess that it would be really dry, considering the weather we've been having and what the other areas are like.... there's some steeper stuff there anyways, right? with the harder stuff? d'be cool to head out for a few hours. saturday would probly work the best for me.... lemme know!

Anyone game for a session at Fossil Rock in the next few days? Visiting my folks in Yelm, and would like to check it out, especially the harder lines there. btw, never climber there, so you'd need to know the place or have good beta....

yeah it seems a bit silly to make any sport into macho gamesmanship. the youth often seem more susceptible to this, still needing to prove their worth through whatever activities they engage in (been there done that, and gotta say i enjoy myself soooo much more having passed that phase). having said that, competition is still way fun, as long as it stays lighthearted and non-judgmental for me, as is going for it in face of risk, ie soloing and such.

some routes are purposefully set up with first bolt stick clips, so it's not really a question of cajones, just common sense. sport routes aren't generally head-points or somesuch, although there's nothing stopping one from making them such.

which means it's subjective. everyone varies in their recovery needs. i've heard of some peeps campusing 5 days in a row. which again means it's subjective. with the tape, it's firstly somewhat controversial whether or not tape really supports the pulleys; secondly, my point is that you'd want to expose all structures to the training stimulus in order for them to strengthen. even if taping did work, it would artificially support the pulleys, disallowing proper training stimulus for strength gains. my opinion obviously, and yes there are differing thoughts on this.

nice vid btw. thanks.

is there any chance that this person could be stopped from posting in non-spray columns? this kind of crap has no place in forums where people want to share their passions about what they do, free from cynical asides. removing these kinds of posts from non-spray columns would probably help in having actual psyched climbers who are pretty good at what they do post more.

http://www.mikedoyle.ca/climbing/traininglinks.shtml more good free training stuff, from a semi-local. i didn't understand layton's "must do's", such as taping the fingers for campusing (never done that or seen it done!) and other modes of training; i think you wanna strengthen your fingers without tape aid. only time i've ever taped is when skin pain warrants it. another comment regards his time off between training days. i think this is highly subjective, depending on the fitness of the climber. there's the idea of getting in shape to train, and when that is accomplished, one can do many forms of training multiple days in a row. i'd say though that for the beginner to intermediate climber, his ideas are pretty good, if not too geared towards weights. good work!

Just my $0.02 here... Who cares what they've done? I'd care what athletes coached by them have done; fair enough. so i would ask then what people coached by them have done. i think that's a critical piece of information, along with the coach's credentials, if one is seriously considering shelling out the bucks that these "seminars" cost! plus, again, judging by the pseudo-questions posed by johnfrieh, one would be much better off spending their money on some very basic training books for oh, say, 20 bucks each. and, wouldn't it be nice if he offered the answers to these questions, instead of using them as teasers to get people to go to an expensive seminar? some great (free) online training info for rock climbing: www.moonclimbing.com www.davemacleod.com both these free sources are very good climbers indeed, and their training advice is excellent. and crackers, can you share exactly what was the best information you got from the seminar, and how did it help you?

yeah what you say is fair enough (although there wasn't anything to "clear" up). i can't argue that outside structure won't help one's training program; many top climbers in europe and elsewhere have had or do have coaching. my amusement was provided by your eager claims of "rad deal!" pontifications, that's all. i think this statement is simply wrong, even if i pretended to understand its relevance to the guru seminars you are cheerleading for. but regardless, i'm sure peeps would get something out of shelling a few hundred bucks to some feller who'll tell 'em what to do; i'm just saying these same peeps can talk to good climbers (maybe even on a forum such as this!) and read certain books, and get the same or better results (when combined with some motivation and discipline). it also reaaalllly depends on what the person's goals are, too. again, my reaction has simply been as much towards the sales-pitch as anything else. i'm sure these dudes teaching are swell guys (who are they anyways and what have they done?) who have useful info. cool on your psych and improvements, btw.