What's your favorite sport climb?

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dru:

what sportclimber screaming and cursing means:

 

waaaa i am a spoiled baby

 

i got a run in my lycra

 

hey look at me on this hard climb

 

i dont suck its my belayer that does - thats why i keep falling here

 

i am trying a climb way too hard for me to impress chix

 

my stick clip broke and i will have to climb to the next bolt

 

the battery on the redpoint laser is dead and i doint know which handhold to reach for next

 

someone put a pumpkin in the big hold on toxic

 

a 15 year old girl climbs better than i ever will

 

Alright, DFA sees how it is around here ... turn your back on these blasted alpo dogs for one second and they're lampooning your favorite sport. Or wait, were they always lampooning said favorite sport?

 

*ahem*

 

A hard-spraying alpinist named Dru

liked flicking sport climbers some doo-doo

But Dru's dis distribution

brought karmic retrobution -

his next life spent as Trask's favorite ewe

 

 

[ 08-27-2002, 02:25 PM: Message edited by: Dr Flash Amazing ]

[Dru]

You know, DFA, I think Tami Knight invented something just for you.

 

She noted that a common embarrasment for 80s sport climbers was a hole in the Lycra in the bum area showing off the asshole. Her solution: ASSHOLE PATTERNED LYCRA in a fetching chocolate starfish print

 

On you, though, it would be like gilding the lily.

[pope]

quote:

---

Originally posted by allison:

quote:

---

Originally posted by pope:

---

Are we confusing happiness with narcissism? You'll get equal pleasure, adventure and sense of accomplishment from a toprope, without the mess left on a typical sport route.

 

No.

 

Mess?

 

Now don't start on me about how the bolts are a major incursion, or I'll start in on how trails are an even bigger incursion, and how if you are anti-bolts, then you should be anti-trails. I bent Dwayner's ear about this pretty bad a few months back.

 

Oh and for what it's worth, the satisfaction of completing a climb on lead, even on bolts, is different. Don't be too judgemental of the experiences of others.

---

Too many bolts constitute a mess. Too many trails constitute a mess. Too many bolts attract too many climbers, resulting in too many trails and other trash. If you're a rap bolter, build a little adventure into your route. Better yet, drill it on the lead. Bold routes with sparse bolts diminish the popularity/crowding problems which ultimately deny access.

[JayB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by pope:

Originally posted by pope:

Are we confusing happiness with narcissism? You'll get equal pleasure, adventure and sense of accomplishment from a toprope, without the mess left on a typical sport route.

Pope:

 

Shouldn't this read " I'dget equal pleasure, adventure, and sense of accomplishment from a toperope..."

 

We know that you believe this, but why should anyone else?

 

I'm pretty confident in saying that just about every climber I've ever met would conclude that the simple fact that you've often got real groundfall potential until you make the 3rd clip or so on most sport climbs makes the comparison completely spurious - unless you specifically instruct your belayer to refrain from even putting you on belay until you're looking at a righteous grounder while toproping. There are also the risks involved with hitting something on the way down, inverting and slamming your head against the rock as well. But hey - why not claim that toproping ice is the same as leading it if the potential for injury during a fall does not objectively change the nature of the risk involved in one versus the other?

 

I'm not trying to be hostile here, I'm just curious. I've heard you state your opinion that leading sport routes and top-roping them are completely equivalent activities as far as risk is concerned, but can't recall seeing you present an argument that would lead anyone else to conclude that such assertions are true. Care to share?

[Dru]

Get out those 800 foot topropes for Monkey Face

 

And I imagine a 36 pitch long rope for toproping Sissy Summits.

[pope]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JayB:

quote:

---

Originally posted by pope:

Originally posted by pope:

Are we confusing happiness with narcissism? You'll get equal pleasure, adventure and sense of accomplishment from a toprope, without the mess left on a typical sport route.

Pope:

 

Shouldn't this read "

I'd

get equal pleasure, adventure, and sense of accomplishment from a toperope..."

 

We know that you believe this, but why should anyone else?

 

I'm pretty confident in saying that just about every climber I've ever met would conclude that the simple fact that you've often got real groundfall potential until you make the 3rd clip or so on most sport climbs makes the comparison completely spurious - unless you specifically instruct your belayer to refrain from even putting you on belay until you're looking at a righteous grounder while toproping. There are also the risks involved with hitting something on the way down, inverting and slamming your head against the rock as well. But hey - why not claim that toproping ice is the same as leading it if the potential for injury during a fall does not objectively change the nature of the risk involved in one versus the other?

 

I'm not trying to be hostile here, I'm just curious. I've heard you state your opinion that leading sport routes and top-roping them are completely equivalent activities as far as risk is concerned, but can't recall seeing you present an argument that would lead anyone else to conclude that such assertions are true. Care to share?

The truth of the assertion depends on the absurdity to which the route is overbolted. I can name...no, I can't name the routes, but I can describe sport areas in which the assertion is absolutely true. A bolt by your knee, your hip and your shoulder......or a toprope.....Which would YOU say is bolder?

[JayB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by pope:

Too many bolts constitute a mess. Too many trails constitute a mess. Too many bolts attract too many climbers, resulting in too many trails and other trash. If you're a rap bolter, build a little adventure into your route. Better yet, drill it on the lead. Bold routes with sparse bolts diminish the popularity/crowding problems which ultimately deny access.

---

If there's quality rock, climbers follow. Yosemite, the Gunks, and Eldo are hardly sport mecca's, and they aren't exactly being ignored by climbers. The key to keeping resources open to climbers is not limiting climber interest, but rather developing sensible policies that mitigate the impact that climbers have on both the rock and the surrounding landscape.

[JayB]

I can see circumstances under which a proliferation of bolts renders a lead no more bold than a toprope, but never less bold than a toprope. I just don't see how that's possible, but I'm willing to listen...

 

Maybe "Clip-em or Skip-em" at Vantage and a few at Exit 38 that I've seen are bolted in such a fashion, but from my perspective routes bolted so thoroughly that the leader sustains at little more risk during the climb than the follower are the exception rather than the rule. I still don't see an argument that would persuade anyone to believe that in general, leading a sport route is no more risky than toproping it. Maybe if you use a #4 stopper as a TR anchor with a static rope or something, but then the argument should be "Toproping a sport route protected only by a woefully inadequate anchor involves more risk than leading it." It that was your claim, I'd have to agree with you - but that of course is not what you've been claiming.

 

Also, with respect to the statement:

 

"The truth of the assertion depends on the absurdity to which the route is overbolted."

 

Does this statement represent the extent of your argument on behalf of the assertion that leading sport routes and top-roping them are equally risky activities?

 

[ 08-27-2002, 04:47 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

[Peter_Puget]

JayB/Pope -

 

Pope's assertion was hardly mean to be taken seriously and to the extent he was "projecting" and I don't mean that in a sport climbing sense he was the one being narcissistic. To judge how or what someone elses experience should/will be is simply the act of a real rock nazi. Had Pope in fact gone to Yosemite he would be quick to respond to you that Yosemite has in fact become very "sport" friendly. There is even a sport climbing guide to the Valley available for those who coudl care less about trad climbing. Last time I was at the Cookie it was amazing how many sport routes had been squeezed in. Here is where Pope's talk about distance falls apart for me and his rock nazi ssspewing counter productive.

 

Some of these routes had been climbed with gear before (ie Cookie Monster) others would be considered legit bolt jobs. Ie the bolts aren't too close together but their simple existence to me is an aesthetic afront. Better they be top ropes than "sporty" sport climbs.

 

PP

[JayB]

I think I'm with you there PP, but (for me) the issues surrounding retrobolting existing lines and/or bolting are separate from the issues under discussion at the moment. I was just looking for an argument to suport the assertions that leading sport routes is as safe as toproping them, and that the presence of sport climbing in any given area automatically raises the spectre of restricted access.

 

I just used Yosemite and the areas to make the case that in practice, it just hasn't been true that the mere existence of reasonably bolted routes = overpopularity = restricted access. Smith has plenty of bolts, gets a staggering amount of climber attention, and yet there's no access problem that I'm aware of. Heuco Tanks had very few bolts relative to all of the climbing, yet climber access there has been severely curtailed. It's all about managing climber impact, which includes a sensible attitude towards bolting. What "sensible" means in practice is different for each area, but for the most part clmbers seem to have gotten it right eventually.

 

[ 08-27-2002, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

[erik]

bolting is the #1 reason that there is now restrictions are heuco tanks......2nd would be the impact to the petroglyphs and surrounding enviroment that the increaed traffic was threating....

 

climbers made their bed in hueco and climbers will have to sleep in it....

[Peter_Puget]

quote:

---

Originally posted by JayB:

[QB]I think I'm with you there mostly, but issues surrounding retrobolting existing lines and/or bolting are separate from the issues under disucssion at the moment.[QB]

---

I mentioned Cookie Monster specifically to seperate the issues. I wanted to indicate that I was more concerned with what would be considered not overly bolted sport routes.

 

The problem I see with too many sport routes isn't that there are a few too many bolts and that a particular sport area will have access problems but rather a sport area ( eg Exit 38 - various crags, Freeway Gun Show 18 bolts in 120 ft.) might be seen as the inevitable consequence of climbing. As such climbing possibilities at future and or less developed areas might be restricted.

 

Sport climbing rocks and as a believer in the future discovery of many new areas I would hate to see development restricted because of unrestricted development at existing crags.

 

PP

 

[ 08-27-2002, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: Peter Puget ]

[JayB]

From what I've read it was the other way around, e.g that it was the concern over the destruction of ancient rock art by climbers that prompted the closure. There were lots of boulder problems in close proximity to, if not right on top of petroglyphs. Were there any bolted routes that imperilled rock are sites? If there were then they certainly fit into a pattern of behavior that resulted in restricted access, but hardly think that they qualify as the number one problem on their own.

 

As far as bolting is concerned, I do recall reading something to the effect that it was illegal to install bolts in the rock, but not to climb bolted routes, so some climbers took to installing bolts at night against the wishes of the land-managers, which in turn resulted in an ever worsening relationship with the land managers? Again, it seems to come down to the behavior of the climbers installing the bolts, rather than the bolts themselves that lead to problems. Installing bolts that clearly violate regulations in sensitive areas or against the expressed wishes of the land managers is one thing, establishing reasonably bolted lines in areas where the authorities have either condoned it, or at least not forbidden it, is another matter entirely.

 

[ 08-27-2002, 04:20 PM: Message edited by: JayB ]

[Dwayner]

P.P. says:

"To judge how or what someone elses experience should/will be is simply the act of a real rock nazi."

 

Baloney. Judging (an opinion - ideational) vs. acting? (phenomenological)? Apples and oranges, Sparky! To deny someone's right to judge whatever is to be a thought-cop. I'm full of ideals and opinions, although I don't think I'd reasonably fall into the category of "rock-nazi" until I reached the point where I was physically blockading sport routes or yanking power drills out of the hands of grid-bolters. Ain't that right, pope!

[Peter_Puget]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dwayner:

P.P. says:

"To judge how or what someone elses experience should/will be is simply the act of a real rock nazi."

 

Baloney. Judging (an opinion - ideational) vs. acting? (phenomenological)?

---

Are you sure you meant "phenomenological." I think not!

 

So until you either fully explain exactly what you mean by the (mis)use of this term I must call BALONEY on you!

 

PP

 

[ 08-27-2002, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: Peter Puget ]

[Dwayner]

P.P.: I'll make it simple for you as you don't seem to be familiar with the terminology.

 

There is a distinction between thought (which belongs in the realm of the ideational) vs. a physical action performed by a physical entity in the physical world.

[allthumbs]

You guys are totally full of shit. Now, where's all the white women at?

[Dwayner]

 

"Luxurious women of all sorts can be found at Dwayner's house, isn't that right, Dwayner!"

 

That's right, funny lookin' guy whose picture I've been plastering into my messages!

[allthumbs]

Incidently Dwayner, that dude looks like a serious cock chugger. Notice the Jay Leno'ish jaw, the glazed eyes and the "come hither lad" smirk.

[MysticNacho]

Too many bolts? Yes indeedy. Too many trails? Now thats stretching it. Better to have a trail so people can stay on it than have them tramping around the underbrush killing everything with their size 18 boots. Trails are one of those things that disappear if people don't use 'em, bolts tend to stick around.

[Off_White]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MysticNacho:

bolts tend to stick around.

---

Boy, not some of those scary rusty 1/4"er's I've clipped. I think you underestimate the power of weather and corrosion.

[mattp]

Mystic -

I agree with you - sort of - but "impact" can be in the eyes of the beholder. At several climbing areas the land managers have been more concerned about the proliferation of "trails" and cliffside erosion than they have been about the bolts. And it has been pointed out that the tiny amount of biomass dissplaced by a whole crag full of bolts is far less than that cause by a short section of trail. Never-the-less, I would generally agree with you that because the installation of a bolt is more permanent, the impact of such an installation must be given greater consideration.

[JayB]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MysticNacho:

Too many bolts? Yes indeedy.

---

Any examples of a climbing area where this actually happened? That is, can you actually find an account of a real climbing area where the simple presence of bolts in rock, rather

than the overall impact on the surrounding landscape, resulted in closure? I've never, ever heard of any such thing happening in the real world, but would certainly be interested in hearing about such a case if you can find one.

[fern]

page top?

[Geek_the_Greek]

Yeah, if you're actually going getting into the environmental impact of sport climbs vs trad climbs, I think trad wins for greater impact.

 

First, though, you'd have to agree on some sort of quantitative measure (like biomass, number of species, whether or not to include subjective things like visual aesthetics, etc.). I'm pretty damned sure more life gets squashed/scrubbed out of cracks than off little edges. I have yet to see tree stumps in the middle of face climbs... The thoroughly offensive visual blight of bolts seems to matter only to humans, and mostly climbers at that. I think chalk marks get more notice than bolts from non-climbers.