lost climbing shoe in leavenworth

[fern]

you can tie a bunch of butterfly knots up a hefty static line and hang that down your runout route from your top-rope anchor and clip your way up as if you were leading a sprot route. No need to put bolts in.

[mattp]

One could do that, Fern. I don't think many would bother, though.

 

I agree with those who say that not every 5.7 climb needs to be bolted for a 5.7 leader. There are, and in my opinion should be, 5.7 climbs that are bolted for a 5.5 leader, and 5.7 climbs that are bolted for a 5.9 leader.

 

As far as the "two tiered" rating system, we already have it. It's not getting attention these days, because it is old school. It is the combination of the technical rating with the movie industry ratings, e.g. 5.9 R or whatever. The climb being discussed here sounds like it would be an "R" which means a fall could result in getting hurt (PG was merely scary but not dangerous, and X was for those climbs with a potential death-fall).

 

Victor Kramer had his own comparable system with the death heads.

 

If there is loose choss, that may make what would have been a 5.9 pg climb into a 5.9 R or even X, or it might warrant a death head in Victor's guide, but if there is an extraordinarly issue with a climb, whether it be bad rock, bogus anchors, great views or anything else, a simple footnote in the guidebook would be better than any rating system.

[catbirdseat]

I might as well put in Victor Kramar's comments for reference.

 

Arete (5.8), one start, one death head. "Normally top-roped but can be led with modern protection." Comments: even with small to medium Aliens, the pro is still pretty marginal in shallow, flaring, horizontal cracklike pockets.

 

Slab (5.7), One star. "The initial cracks provide solid placements, but protection possibilities dwindle near the top.Comments: There is nothing at all above a 4 inch ledge. You might be able to get a knifeblade or two in if you tried hard enough.

[Bronco]

How hard is the climbing above the final pro on the controversial pitch? Are you above the crux? I'm relatively new to climbing but even I understand the distinction between "a fall would be bad" vs. "a fall is not likely so it doesen't matter becasue it's just phsycological danger that engineering types may worry about because there's no pro"

 

But, I don't know what climb you're talking about in the first place so it's all spectacular speculation on my part.

[atomic]

So if you flash a 5.7 R, you can tell yourself, "wow, I sent that baby and it's totally run-out and since I'm a sissy, it might as well have been an 11a...."

 

Sort of like saying to yourself, "wow, I got a B+ on that mid-term, but I didn't study, so I must be a total a genius...."

 

[Dru]

the deaths head, or r/x system, does not distinguish between runout climbs on good rock, and runout climbs on bad rock. is a 5.8X, or 5.8 3 skull route, so rated because it is unprotected the whole way on bomber rock, or is it so rated because it climbs up a potato chip flake of rotten sandstone so wobbly that the whole thing might peel off one day for no discernable reason

 

i am willing to solo or run it out big pitches on bomber granite, karstic solid gray limestone, gneiss, quartzite but not as much on terrain where the rock is unevaluably bad like when weighting suspect nubbins at Smith, or unavoidably fractured, like on volcanic junk or yellow limestone or certain frost shattered alpine routes.

[catbirdseat]

Bronco said:

How hard is the climbing above the final pro on the controversial pitch? Are you above the crux? I'm relatively new to climbing but even I understand the distinction between "a fall would be bad" vs. "a fall is not likely so it doesen't matter becasue it's just phsycological danger that engineering types may worry about because there's no pro"

 

But, I don't know what climb you're talking about in the first place so it's all spectacular speculation on my part.

The crux is just before the anchors as far as you can get from the last piece of pro. Granted at 5.7 that wouldn't faze a 5.11 climber for a NY minute.

[Ade]

Dru said:

 

by a 2 part system you mean like the Brits E1 5c or whatever one grade for the pro one grade for the moves?

 

i personally think a 3 part system would be best, one for technical difficulty, one for mental difficulty (exposure and runout) and 1 for objective hazard ie looseness, ankle breaking ledges and so on.

 

the reason for the 3rd part of the rating being I'd rather be 100 foot runout, or soloing, on bomber rock than 20 feet runout on loose choss.

 

The Brit system has an adjectival grade (eg E1), covering how strenuous/sustained the route is as well as how well protected and exposed. In addition the technical grade (eg 5c) denotes how hard the hardest move is on the route. Typically for multi pitch routes each pitch gets a technical grade and the whole climb would get an adjectival grade (eg for a four pitch route E2 5c, 5a, 4c, 5b)

 

Some Brit guides (Yorkshire) have a three part system with a P-grade for the likely result of a fall.

 

UK Climbing Grades

World Climbing Grade Comparison Table

 

Bolted sport climbs in the UK use the French grading system.