TednCda Posted June 26, 2004 Share Posted June 26, 2004 I have followed this thread with much interest. Though I seldom feel the need to add to he discussion, a little historical perspective might be appropriate. Since the days of Whymper, younger climbers have striven to show the old generation how much better the new generation is. They have looked at the "last great problems" any number of times and conquered it. The next generation then comes along and finds a harder version of the "last great problem". This has been an improtant part of the appeal of climbing, whether mountaineering in the extreme reaches of the Himalaya or simply exploring our capabilities on local crags. There has always been some problem that the older generation labled as impossible. Then some young climber comes along and shows everyone it can be done. Much of the challenge of climbing is mental and within ourselves. Dane earlier said that in order to climb a trad ropute, we must first master the fear within ourselves. I suspect that all of the contributors to this thread climb much better than this fat old man ever will, but even at their level they must deal with the fear within themselves first, then with the technical difficulty of the climb. Beating the climb down to an acceptable level of fear, either by altering the rock or by placing bolts every 3 feet removes that ultimate challenge for every other climber who comes after the person altering the route. Beating a climb down with traditional pro every 3 feet if it is available does not alter the fear level for the next climber, it does not reduce the challenge for the next generation. One must ask, how many of us would desire to climb the nose of El Cap if there were bolts every 3 feet all the way to the top. Frankly, I suspect no-one would find any challenge much greater than that of seeing how many pull-ups they can do at the gym. The tragedy of DH and other areas where the rock is altered to make holds where there were none or to make the climbing less of a mental game in dealing with fear, is that the challenge for the next generation is no longer there. The rock has been brought down to the level of the present generation whose arrogance says to the world "I am the best, I am the best right now that climbs this rock and I am the best that will ever climb this rock." They are right because their actions have altered the rocke so there is nothing left to challenge the next generation of climbers. Imaagine if the top climbers of the the day 30 or 50 or 100 years ago would have had the ability to chip holds and alter the rock so that there was nothing harder thatn what they could climb. Who would have any interest in climbing today? Our sport demands that we preserve the challenge for the next generation. Marty has stated that 40 years from now, no one will remember who made the first assent. Maybe not, but the better question is 40 years from now, will Marty and the others who brought the rock down to their level be remembered as the people who killed climbing by taking the challenge away and making it no more than a meaningless exercise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 26, 2004 Share Posted June 26, 2004 Ted...you make interesting points, very interesting...however you are missing the main point of what happened at dishman (i'm guessing as i live in seattle, but know many of the climbers there)... THe routes were altered for convenience, not to reduce their difficulty...Marty never implied that he and his crew were trying to do the "last great problem"...hell, the routes are .11+ to 12-...hardly cutting edge, whether headpointed, traditionally protected, soloed or clipped up...Marty and crew were trying to make wider use of a limited crag and make it availabel for a wider spectrum of urban climber...They were not making any kind of grandiose statement like you are implying... FWIW, there are several extremely hard bolted projects of Marty's that he's pretty much said "have at it" to any one that can actually go out and do them, instead of chipping them to something that he could redpoint quickly...that kind of goes against your logic, doesn't it?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TednCda Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 RuMR My point was not that the routes were made easier, though what else can one assume when holds are bolted on and hold's are chipped into the rock. By definition, it is easier because there are more holds. My concern is that a line that was not climbable at current standards was made climbable by chipping holds. Quote: From Marty -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I am guilty of putting holds on my route in that area. Anyone is welcome to fill in the holes provided that they can climb the route without them. You would impress me to no end, but otherwise forget about destroying my route and the others. They are good rockclimbs and add great challenges to the Dishman Crag. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By Marty's own admission he changed a route that he and others could not climb into an 11 or 12. Who can say what the limit will be 10 years from now. And now we will never know if it could have been climbed by somebody next year. The fact that they are now good climbs doesn't negate the fact that they are not the climb they would have become when standards advance beyond what they are now. And they will advance. As to going against my logic, the question is whether we are climbing for the mental challenge of overcoming our fears or for the physical challenge of making moves. Most of us are probably doing both. My point is that when the mental challenge is taken out of climbing by making the climb easier and/or more protected, then we are only doing a gym exercise in another location. The second point is that once altered, the rock will not grow back. We should respect what is there and leave what we cannot do for those who come after , we should meet the standards the rock imposes on the climber, not vice versa. As for going agianst my logic, all of us are complex people who do and say many interesting and often contradictory things. Keeps life interesting for all and adds a little bit of unpredictability. I, for one, like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Much of Marty's position is making some of the routes accessible to moderate climbers...wouldn't that be a form of "respect"???? I am a moderate climber and if the only way I can make it up a route is to have someone retrobolt, chip and artificial-hold it down to my level - no thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Yeah. Sorry, RuMR, I just don't see what you're saying about "respect". If you can't climb it as it is, why not look elsewhere, or get better? There are already more moderate climbs around the PNW than you could climb in your lifetime. And your "all sport or all trad" argument, what was it again? A guidebook can certainly describe what protection is useful on a route that has both bolts and natural pro, if you're uncomfortable just taking a small rack up anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 to me it just seems silly to sink a ton of $$ into developing a route (it costs a fair bit to install a sport route...usually more than $75) and still require a few sundry pieces...to each their own... and Ted...Marty replaced a red sling w/ a hold, that was being used to A0 the move...which is more visible?? I know the counter point to that though, that being that the sling can always be removed...big deal...and also, i know MANY routes that were chipped into harder routes than what they would have been before...ie big holds were knocked off, or sanded into slippery non positive holds...how does that fit into your equation?? My point about "respect", Slothtrop, involved hardcore climbers putting up runout routes that are waaaay below their ultimate ability...its stupid when someone requires more protection at THEIR OWN LEVEL but will not afford a less talented climber the same luxury at their respective level...Marty is probably capable of soloing many of those bolt jobs...trust me, he didn't retro those for himself... Ted, I think you are right that we are all complex and do sometimes contradictory things...Isn't that the magic of climbing??? You can go out and get a kick ass workout in a stimulating environment OR you can go scare yourself silly in a an adventure to remember when you are an old doddering man, OR you can even have a combination of those two... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Hey Dru...isn't their something happening in the world of squids to report on?? Something over in sprayland?? TA TA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted June 27, 2004 Author Share Posted June 27, 2004 THe routes were altered for convenience, not to reduce their difficulty...Marty never implied that....11+ to 12-...hardly cutting edge, whether headpointed, traditionally protected, soloed or clipped up...Marty and crew were trying to make wider use of a limited crag and make it available for a wider spectrum of urban climber... Let me be very clear Marty's routes at Dishman {and some of the others} are altered for convenience, to reduce their difficulty. Any misrepresebntation past that fact is a lie. You think this is the only place this is happened with this crew? Get real. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 My point about "respect", Slothtrop, involved hardcore climbers putting up runout routes that are waaaay below their ultimate ability...its stupid when someone requires more protection at THEIR OWN LEVEL but will not afford a less talented climber the same luxury at their respective level...Marty is probably capable of soloing many of those bolt jobs...trust me, he didn't retro those for himself... Ok, I can see how that's a bad deal. Establishing a moderate route with needless runouts while putting bolts every bodylength on your sick proj... hmm... kind of a tough problem. Perhaps the FA was just saving time and money on bolts by running it out on "easy" ground. Not exactly a thoughtful way to establish a route. If a less bold or more safety-conscious climber had gotten there first, things would be different. I guess I side with the FA and would seek permission from him/her before adding bolts. I don't see why a crag route shouldn't be established so that protection is always available to keep you from hitting the ground. But is that what was going on at Dishman? I thought the issue here was retrobolting routes with available natural protection. Lack of a bolt does not constitute a runout if there is other pro available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 .... I thought the issue here was retrobolting routes with available natural protection. Lack of a bolt does not constitute a runout if there is other pro available. Very true...adequate gear is protection as much as a bolt is... as i said before, i've never climbed in spokane, so i don't know what is going on there...i'm only commenting based on what i've read as marty's position on this board and the fact that i have some pretty good friends that climbed w/ Marty when they were living in spokane... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 (edited) For the 15th time. I didn't bolt any holds on. I didn't write the names on. I didn't retro the routes. I agree with the addition of the manufactured routes. Human ability is finite. If I'm wrong and it isn't, the guy without the limitation isn't showing up to Dishman with or without bolts, graffitti, trad lines, etc. He'll be living off a sponsors check in Europe or somewhere where they don't scrape and scrounge for climbs. And Dane, the route I manufactured (I don't know the others reasonings) merely connects the dots. Again, feel free to fill the pockets (6 tablespoons of anchor cement in my estimation) in and do the route. If you can't do the route this way then please leave the pockets the way they were. Others might like to try a "possible" route. Edited June 28, 2004 by Marty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 Hey Dru...isn't their something happening in the world of squids to report on?? Something over in sprayland?? TA TA hey rudy you don't like it when i have something serious to say that rebuts some ridiculous assertion of yours? i have developed a fair number of routes with mixed gear and bolts and if there is even one place where natural gear will go in I leave that spot for trad gear and not bolts. for 2 reasons 1) because it's cheaper and saves money, 2) because it keeps chicken, wont-place-gear sporto climbers off the routes and ensures that on busy days when the bolt lines are completely full that merely by throwing my rack in the car when I drive to Cheakamus I can have a great day of climbing without waiting in a line. trad is rad. in fact ive lugged a #4 camalot up 30 meters of bolted face just to plug it in at the crux of a route then clipped more bolts above. i think routes like this are better than fully bolted routes and there are many others who do too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 28, 2004 Share Posted June 28, 2004 ahhh...you don't have to ...i was just having a little fun witcha... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted June 28, 2004 Author Share Posted June 28, 2004 I agree with the addition of the manufactured routes. Human ability is finite. And that my young friend is the most egotistical statement you have made to date. Sadly ignorant of the facts as well besides being obviously mistaken. You want to manufacture routes do so on something you actual do own and not public domain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drater Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 I agree with the addition of the manufactured routes. Human ability is finite. And that my young friend is the most egotistical statement you have made to date. Sadly ignorant of the facts as well besides being obviously mistaken. You want to manufacture routes do so on something you actual do own and not public domain. Dane, cheers to that. Marty, if you want to desecrate rock and reduce difficulty down to your level, do it somewhere where it will only matter to you & your "inner-circle" of chip-aholic fuckwads. Obviously, the majority of climbers don't feel the same as you about this issue. So chipping holds & creating "routes" somewhere where multiple user groups of climbers climb is unacceptable. If you have to do it, do it at some bum-fuck crag where only you know of. Oh, and one other piece of advice: Better keep your chipping and gluing meglomaniacal self out of the Okanogan. First route you fuck with there is going to have a semi-permanent rap anchor: YOUR BALL SACK!! Wouldn't want to see that happen so keep your "questionable" ethics away! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 You guys have rock in the Okanogan? Where exactly is that rock cause Omak is only like 2 hrs from Spokane if you drive fast? I'll load my "Perfect Circle" up in the old Toyota and be there to check it out this weekend. Cheers, Marty. Also Drill and bolts or cams? You know I don't like to use both at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCash Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Marty, who bolted Grape Ape and The Force? Grady Roberts? Why were they bolted? I just can't understand how two easy crack routes with excellent protection that have been lead safely for 15 years, now need bolts. It was an interesting discussion last week between our group and the "regulars" at Dishman. I was quite astonished to learn that they liked the new Dishman, with all its ethical atrocities, better than the old. They did think the bolting of Grape Ape in the last few weeks was stupid though. One statement that they made, for example: "Dishman used to be mostly topropes, but now routes are regularly lead." Is this because of better bolts, more bolts, turning combination protection climbs into sport climbs, and bolting trad lines? They seemed to think all of the above. I don't have a problem with retrobolting bad bolts and adding new ones as long as the first ascentionists agree with it, and it's not near a crack. It's just a shame things went so overboard at Dishman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Marty, who bolted Grape Ape and The Force? Grady Roberts? Why were they bolted? I just can't understand how two easy crack routes with excellent protection that have been lead safely for 15 years, now need bolts. Mcash, you know more than I do. This is news to me. As far as these routes being led safely for 15 years I think you are a bit disillusioned. I've only seen top roping out there for 10 years straight. No one led before the bolts. It was just like Minnehaha. Most of the routes were run out and the protection sketchy at best. Why these 2 you speak of were retro'd.....I haven't a clue. Go ask Grady if he did in fact do it. "It was an interesting discussion last week between our group and the "regulars" at Dishman. I was quite astonished to learn that they liked the new Dishman, with all its ethical atrocities, better than the old. They did think the bolting of Grape Ape in the last few weeks was stupid though." "Astonished"? You're astonished to find out that not everyone thinks that risking injury and death after work is fun? People just want to go out and do a few routes. They don't want to get hurt or die next to Appleway Toyota. THAT IS FOR THE WILDERNESS. "It's just a shame things went so overboard at Dishman". Who are you to decide overboard? Give me your credentials to be able to make such a decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drater Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 You guys have rock in the Okanogan? Where exactly is that rock cause Omak is only like 2 hrs from Spokane if you drive fast? I'll load my "Perfect Circle" up in the old Toyota and be there to check it out this weekend. Cheers, Marty. Also Drill and bolts or cams? You know I don't like to use both at the same time. Marty, Crampons & Ice Axes is the preferred gear. Climbings only good after heavy rainfall. Then the less-than-vertical dirt walls get soft enough to climb but only for a few hours. YEAH RIGHT!! Grab Maynard and the rest of the "tools" and head on over. I'm sure you'll get a warm welcome. Some of them boys haven't seen a woman in so long anything in Lycra or Prana looks good to them. Take your lube. Sorry so beligerent in post yesterday, my opinion is no more valid than yours even if I think yours is totally fucked up. Which I do. Whatever. Have fun with it. Just don't do it around me. Blowboarder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Blowboarder you are extremely fair today and your TOOL reference even cracked me up. I'll have you know that I really am not a big fan of chipping, but am honest enough to admit that it happens and can be benificial in certain instances, (and detrimental in other instances). I really won't be coming over soon but I might some day to do some of those trad routes in that certain canyon you guys seem so gaurded about. Maybe we'll meet. Since I've been Devils advocating a bit I'll bet our ethics aren't tooo far apart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slaphappy Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Does anyone really think that a short route that is almost completely moderate, but yet has one blank section with a manufactured hold, is gonna be the "testpiece" of future super climbers? There is far more grandiose rock for these future super men/women than is currently being utilized. I'm not a fan of chipping but I do think some of you are making a far bigger deal out of it than it warrants. Although I can't think of an example I can actually see how the end result could be better than if it was left as 30' of 5.10 to one move of 5.17Z to 40' of 5.10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drater Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Blowboarder you are extremely fair today and your TOOL reference even cracked me up. I'll have you know that I really am not a big fan of chipping, but am honest enough to admit that it happens and can be benificial in certain instances, (and detrimental in other instances). I really won't be coming over soon but I might some day to do some of those trad routes in that certain canyon you guys seem so gaurded about. Maybe we'll meet. Since I've been Devils advocating a bit I'll bet our ethics aren't tooo far apart. Marty, grab the rack & head on over. Just leave the Bosch & bolts at home. No use wasting good money equipping routes someone will promptly remove. Not that I haven't wanted to bolt some amazing lines there, I just have to respect the ethic the place was developed in by the people that turned me onto climbing and the area. Speaking of Omak and gear routes, you should check out Omak Crack.FA by Dave Jones (Cochise Stronghold hardman that lived in area back in early 90's). Rated it at "hard" 12a but I think that some sandbagging was in effect. It's spanked me every time on it, and I've onsited trad routes in Yosemite just below that grade. After working some 13a cracks in the Valley & Spain, I think that's closer to actual grade than 12a. Bring a #5 Camelot (you'll be glad you lugged the fukker up that far) but please, once again, leave the bolting kit at home. This area isn't on private property but on Tribal Land (who consider the rock more sacred even than the staunchest traditionalist) and a bolting spree back in the mid 90's got the area shut down. Hard work & close friendships have opened it back up, but must be treated with respect to maintain access. I would like to see what someone of your climbing ability thinks of OC, as it has never been onsited and required years of working the route by some solid 5.12 climbers for the redpoints. Which I still can't claim. Couple other quality routes hidden among all the choss as well, watch out for snakes and loose rock. Does trundling count as chipping? If so, I'm guilty as hell as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dane Posted June 30, 2004 Author Share Posted June 30, 2004 Who are you to decide overboard? Gezzzzeeeeeeeeeeeeeeus. Marty if you can look me in the face and tell me Dishman isn't the posterchild for a "overboard" I'd be amazed. It is overboard in every way. Using some common sense and retro bolting within reason is one thing...the mess at Dishman is another. You don't need a climbing resume to know that bolting a 5.8 crack is pretty lame. Or that plastic needs to stay in the gym and off the rock. Or that chopping (the correct term for the size of holds on Dishman not chipping) should stay at the wood pile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Does anyone really think that a short route that is almost completely moderate, but yet has one blank section with a manufactured hold, is gonna be the "testpiece" of future super climbers? There is far more grandiose rock for these future super men/women than is currently being utilized. I'm not a fan of chipping but I do think some of you are making a far bigger deal out of it than it warrants. Although I can't think of an example I can actually see how the end result could be better than if it was left as 30' of 5.10 to one move of 5.17Z to 40' of 5.10. well phrased! But there are many that would argue that NO route is better than having to force a line... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slothrop Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Yeah, I'd say "no route" is better than a chipped route. If the route doesn't go, it doesn't go. Manufactured routes are what gyms are for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.