Jump to content

Technique or Strength? 5.10-5.12


coyote

Recommended Posts

quote:

Originally posted by Heinouscling:

Ah shit, now you're trying to compare 5.11 sport to ice climbing? Dru, please.

No I'm comparing climbing 5.11 to drinking
mad.gif" border="0
learn to read mofo
mad.gif" border="0rolleyes.gif" border="0

I've never climbed with you Dru so you have to know that I was pulling your chain. Didn't you see the Razz gremlin? Besides, I consider it very bad style to comment on someone else's climbing unless said person puts your life in danger and you feel obligated to warn someone who may be considering that person as a partner. Also, YOU admitted to sketching on 5.11.

As for my own climbing, I firmly believe in modesty. Action, not words! But this topic sort of pushed me into commenting on my climbing which I try to steer away from. Because, in all honesty, I DO SUCK!! I just had a "good day" a few months back. Now my beer belly won't let me get up anything.

As for Squamish? Crack and sport are two different animals and I readily admit that I suck at crack.

Now, when it comes to pleasuring women, there is no "better" then I.
cool.gif" border="0

-Heinous

I actually mistyped that. I meant sketching on 5.1 not 5.11 rolleyes.gif" border="0

I like how you mentioned you "suck...crack"[sic] right next to the comment about pleasuring women. Talk about subliminal reinforcement! wink.gif" border="0 Trask are you paying attention here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

quote:

Originally posted by willstrickland:
Do I want to climb this level to open up new and more challenges to myself and to be able to climb some really cool routes? If so then go with the first way. You'll get good and you'll have tons of cool routes under your belt.


Will, I have to agree with you here.

We must remember that difficulty and quality are not always equal, when it comes to particular climbs. It would make sense, though, that the harder one climbs, the more high quality routes become available to that climber. Smith being a perfect example. Of coarse, there are some that would say Smith has NO high quality routes.

This brings up an interesting question. What is the definition of a poser? This could be a good topic for a new thread.

-Heinous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Dru:

I actually mistyped that. I meant sketching on 5.1 not 5.11
rolleyes.gif" border="0

I like how you mentioned you "suck...crack"[sic] right next to the comment about pleasuring women. Talk about subliminal reinforcement!
wink.gif" border="0
Trask are you paying attention here?

Ha, ha. Dru, you're quick. Yes, the crack that I suck has nothing at all to do with Squamish!!

Dru, do you suck at crack?

HOW MANY CCers SUCK AT CRACK?!?!?

-Heinous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Heinouscling:
So, how do you all feel Smith is rated, compared to other areas, such as RR?

-Heinous

i find that smith climbing is generally less secure and more sketchy. at red rocks, skaha, jacks canyon etc. the holds are more positive and the clipping stances less awkward so you feel more secure. oh yeah the fact that they all have soft grades could have something to do with it. climbing at smith is @#!!@*# hard!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by dyno merchant:
So i figured it out...don't train hard. instead, find the "softest" graded routes and send them. right?

so where should we go?

I've been told Skaha has soft grades. I might say this about the older routes but the newer ones did not strike me as easy. Especially on "Claim it all" wall.

-Heinous

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Heinouscling:

I've been told Skaha has soft grades. I might say this about the older routes but the newer ones did not strike me as easy. Especially on "Claim it all" wall.

-Heinous

true...but isn't it weird that the older routes there are the softer graded ones. is seems that in most areas the oldschoolers totally sandbagged people. at skaha, did they want to boost all the vancouverites egos!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the people that originally developed skaha were the ones who were getting old and burned off at squamish by the harder climbers. except rick cox and gary wolkoff, the interior boys... those guys rated HARD!!!!! like Turbocharger at 10a, that was the worlds hardest 10a at that grade, its 10d now but most people still think its harder than that.... grin.gif" border="0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...