Ratings

[Cpt.Caveman]

It's next to Easter Island

[plexus]

Hey, so I gotta big head. Doesn't mean I look like one of them statutes .

Dru, are you a closet spandex wearer?

[plexus]

Geez,

What five posts in 30 minutes. Can you tell I'm procrastinating at work.

[Dru]

I think I just did 20 posts in 20 minutes or thereabouts, its these insult fests with Caveman.

I don't wear Lycra in the closet I wear it out in the open!!! Usually when I am doing the Elvis and dogging on 10b sport routes at Smith Rocks. See you all there this weekend for a display of how to have an epic on a sport climb, watch me crater trying to clip 2nd bolt on BBQ The Pope again and then watch some 8 year old girl solo it.

[Bronco]

Most places I have climbed, stuff is rated way too low.

[willstrickland]

quote:

---

Originally posted by plexus:

Get off the numbers kick!

---

Read the thread topic!

[Peter_Puget]

Plexus is right! The question isn't if a route is hard or light compared to the rating but rather what areas seem to have the most best ratings. That is to say: What areas have their route's ratings best reflected in their guidebook.

[climberbro16]

ARe you really from ENgland PUget?

[plexus]

I'm just endorsing an idea John Sherman wrote about, how people get attatched to ratings. If you step back and get familiar with the climbing at an area (i.e. Squamish, Icicle, Joshua Tree), you'll find that you won't be dependent on what a guidebook tells you.

I could say that Squamish is soft, Index is hard and Joshua Tree rocks, but that is where I am coming from. It is also dependent on the type of climbing I am proficient at and what types of climbs I enjoy and also where you call your local crag.

I have scampered up a 5.10b like it was no big deal and have gotten the severe case of Elvis Legs on a 5.8, all at the same place. That isn't to say that the 5.10b is graded too soft or the 5.8 sandbagged, it's all what you're comfortable with and good at.

If you've been climbing at say Icicle for 10 years, you could look at a wall and tell what is going to go, because you are familiar with the characteristics of the rock in the canyon.

Just find a line and have fun.

[Peter_Puget]

After reading my post its seems evident that I can't even write English. Actually I am here in Seattle but isn't there a poor Peter in a cemetery in Bath?

[climberbro16]

I see I see..

[Matt_Anderson]

Obviously, grade inflation has occurred over the years. It seems to me that there are two or three legitimate rating systems that might deserve to be discussed - of course are called the YDS by their proponents: Trad Climbers, Early Sport Climbers, and Steep Sport Climbers. Each was formed during a different era and the touchstone for each is the magnet crag that defined that type of climbing's heyday or formative years.

The first (and my preferred) is the YDS as interpretted by trad climber. Yosemite still seems to define it, but Index has always seemed spot on to me and pretty damn consistent in the grades. By anchoring your inner scale of what you think you can climb there, you can go just about anywhere (provided that you are sufficiently well rounded) and be able to figger our which trad climbs will be challenging, but possible.

Smith Rock nurtured American Sport Climbing in its formative years. Sport climbers switched their focus to Smith and, because of the schism, divorced themselves from using Yosemite as their touchstone for ratings. A side effect of sport climbing was a need for many of its proponents to look good for the mags by climbing harder routes (as opposed to doing so by generating a reputation for sandbags or climbs regarding mental control). As a result (and counterintutively) when sport climbers specialized, grade inflation occurred. (Spurred on by the commercial members of the community wanting joe and jane six-pack to feel good about doing harder climbs). Anyway, for the same reason that I look to Yosemite (and by proxy, Index) to determine what I can climb trad-wise, I look to Smith for Sport: Both places served as the magnet for the nation's climbers during the point in time when ratings for their respective disciplines were formed. (As a side note, it seems to me that the ratings in the gorge are no harder than those on the tuft, provided you have an equal amount of experience on its primary style (trad vs. sport) and rock type (basalt vs. tuft).

Of course, since then, a steeper style of sport climbing has won in popularity over the vertical crimpfests found at Smith. It seems to me that there has been another discrete grade inflation that occurred along with it. If my theory that the national magnet climbing area for a style of climbing should always serve as a touchstone for the grade's for such climbing, then Rifle would probably be it for that type of climbing. I wouldn't know, I've never been there. If it's Red Rocks - OH BOY! I'm monster strong! matt

[plexus]

Damn Matt A.,

Is that the opening paragraph for your thesis? Nicely put and I like how you segmented the various factions of climbing and presented each case.Obviously you went to college and didn't spend all of your time

Do some mojo for a dry morning tomorrow, trying to get out and climb with a legend (and no it's not Big Lou or Beckey).

[Matt_Anderson]

Wish I was heading out. Instead I'll be heading downstairs to my garage gym tonight. Incidently, its the magnet crag for my ilk: "Northwest Punter."

Matt

[Matt_Anderson]

Unlike Yosemite, where beer calms the nerves and serves as a performance enhancer, for the northwest punter, scotch deadens the nerves in your tips and fingers and serves as a performance enhancer.

Yahoo! I finally used that damn beer dude. . . .

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: Matt Anderson ]

[Peter_Puget]

Well when I started this thread I was hoping to get a sense of how people viewed ratings at various areas and wasn’t attempting to start a discussion on grade inflation. Many good points have been made and I thought I’d throw my two cents in quickly without elaboration and bring up one important yet I think neglected factor in grade inflation – improvements in technology

Ratings gain their real meaning thru experience. Ratings are a means of communicating this experience to one another. I believe that any rating system over time will tend to suffer grade inflation and that changes in climbing styles, equipment and an increase in the participating population will tend to speed up this trend. This grade inflation does not occur equally over the entire sport and will occur in a staccato manner. This is entirely a matter of social relations and not one of marketing, although marketing can exacerbate the underlying phenomenon.

Since technology hasn’t been discussed so far here are a couple of examples to illustrate.

Sticky rubber – Clearly sticky rubber made many routes easier than they were using hard rubber. As local examples think of On the Verge at Index, any route at Static Point, Slipping Clutch at Squamish or finally RPM at Snow Creek Wall. With the exception of On the Verge none of these routes have been down rated to reflect the widespread use of sticky rubber.

Use of Cams – As a sidebar I should note that some considered cams unethical at first. These definitely made climbing easier and less committing. While some may argue that difficulty of placing protection or commitment shouldn’t be reflected in the YDS rating it is obvious that it is impossible to eliminate the effects of these factors. Here are some local examples: Thin Fingers at Index and ROTC at Midnight. Again these routes weren’t down rated. Good examples at Yosemite would be Pinky Paralysis or Spiderman.

[haireball]

quote:

---

Originally posted by willstrickland:

Fair enough, originally given 5.8 I might be confused, but I'd swear I've seen that given 5.9 somewhere. There's really only five or six ratings anyway: 5.easy, 5.hard, 5.awkward, 5.fun, 5.dirty, 5.scary....

---

my favorite was always 5.phooey... always and everywhere unerringly accurrate

[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: haireball ]

[Bronco]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Puget:

Well when I started this thread I was .

---

TROLLING!!!

[Cpt.Caveman]

It's all 5.8 until you crater!

[Dru]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Puget:

Well when I started this thread I was hoping to get a sense of how people viewed ratings at various areas and wasn’t attempting to start a discussion on grade inflation. Many good points have been made and I thought I’d throw my two cents in quickly without elaboration and bring up one important yet I think neglected factor in grade inflation – improvements in technology

Ratings gain their real meaning thru experience. Ratings are a means of communicating this experience to one another. I believe that any rating system over time will tend to suffer grade inflation and that changes in climbing styles, equipment and an increase in the participating population will tend to speed up this trend. This grade inflation does not occur equally over the entire sport and will occur in a staccato manner. This is entirely a matter of social relations and not one of marketing, although marketing can exacerbate the underlying phenomenon.

Since technology hasn’t been discussed so far here are a couple of examples to illustrate.

Sticky rubber – Clearly sticky rubber made many routes easier than they were using hard rubber. As local examples think of On the Verge at Index, any route at Static Point, Slipping Clutch at Squamish or finally RPM at Snow Creek Wall. With the exception of On the Verge none of these routes have been down rated to reflect the widespread use of sticky rubber.

Use of Cams – As a sidebar I should note that some considered cams unethical at first. These definitely made climbing easier and less committing. While some may argue that difficulty of placing protection or commitment shouldn’t be reflected in the YDS rating it is obvious that it is impossible to eliminate the effects of these factors. Here are some local examples: Thin Fingers at Index and ROTC at Midnight. Again these routes weren’t down rated. Good examples at Yosemite would be Pinky Paralysis or Spiderman.

---

Slipping Clutch may have got easier with Sticky Rubber but it got harder too with the usual moss lichen and slime. Maybe you were thinking of a clean slab climb like Dream On?

[Wallstein]

Peter, so ROTC was put up before cams? I thought it was done in the early 80's by Croft? Maybe I am mistaken but I would assume he was using cams at this point. I don't see how that could get downrated from 11c. I think it is on par or harder to things like Blind Faith in yosemite which is 11d and the left side of the split pillar that is 12a. These three climbs all have the dreaded 1 1/4" to 1 3/4" rattly finger cruxes and I thought ROTC was definately the hardest.

[ 11-06-2001: Message edited by: Wallstein ]

[johnny]

Peter, you are dead-on with the technology thing. I have climbed several times now at Stone Mountain here in NC. Much like Static Point, steep, high quality granite friction. My girlfriend had never climbed before anywhere yet cruised up some pretty highly graded stuff on her first visit.

All or at least most of the routes were established from the ground up, placing bolts on lead from super run-out, sketchy friction stances with old-school rubber. When many of these routes were established, they were given pretty high ratings due to the epic nature of their construction. Now I can waltz over and pad my way up what was once an epic in my fancy new Scarpas. Many first time climbers can now follow 9's and 10's on their first day without too much trouble here.

Unless of course you are Royal Robbins or Fred Beckey and what they call 5.8 the rest of us call 10b...........

[Cpt.Caveman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Wallstein:

These three climbs all have the dreaded 1 1/4" to 1 3/4" rattly finger cruxes and I thought ROTC was definately the hardest.

---

Maybe most people have bigger fingers and hands than you and it makes it easier. Not that I would know but just a thought...... Never done it, probably never will.

[Wallstein]

Nope Cayey.

Most people I climb with say I have an advantage with the smaller hands/fingers. I seem to get a lot more hand jams than most of my parnters. The 1 1/4" to 1 3/4" is a bad size for everyone.

[Dru]

ROTC was done by Boving Yeah? Croft did Stevens Pass Motel, etc. Left Side of the Split was done by Nic Taylor of Australia (same dude there is picture of in Twilight Zone in yosemite Climber) in 1975, first 5.12 in Pacific NW even if it did get rated 10+ at the time!! Croft and Beckham did 2nd free ascent in 1980's, thought it was first free hence the other name (Grand Wazoo) rated it 11+, it was 1992 McLane guide that upgraded to 12a where it has rested ever since.