Bolting discussion.

[scott_harpell]

I don't disagree, but I feel you have made the implication that in sport climbing, part of the actual climb is figuring out how you are going to clip the bolt. This, to me, seems rather contrived if avoidance of this is possible (via TR). To me, climbing is well... climbing... It seems to you that the definition could not be separated from the use of bolts because these bolts add an extra element (ie make it harder) to the climb. I on the other hand find these things to be a distraction and unfortunately sometimes a necessary evil.

[Bogen]

Is trad leading more than "machismo jollies?"

 

No, it is necessity so you don't splat if you fuck up.

Aren't bolts necessity so you don't splat on unprotectable faces? Sport leading is more fun than top roping, you seem to be saying that since it is not as dangerous as trad leading, we shouldn't bother. WTF? I say that trad leading on granite is practically sport-climbing compared to Rockies limestone, so we're all pussies compared to the folks in Canmore.

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

but I feel you have made the implication that in sport climbing, part of the actual climb is figuring out how you are going to clip the bolt

 

You've sort of come up with this on your own. It's doubtful anyone sport climbs for the experiencing of fitting draw to bolt or rope to draw, which is typically a trivial act, although it can also be rather desperate from an insecure stance. While part of the climb IS typically figuring out how you're going to clip at least a couple of the bolts, in DFA's experience this is a secondary element, if it even enters the equation. As stated before, the satisfaction of leading IS part of the equation, hence the prevalence of bolts vs. toprope anchors.

[iain]

All I can say is it's much more satisfying to top out after leading a sport climb than on top rope. Who doesn't feel this way??? It feels better not to have a rope in your face, which feels less "pure" as you say than with the rope following you. It's just the way of things.

[scott_harpell]

Aren't bolts necessity so you don't splat on unprotectable faces?

 

Not if you can TR... which was my point.

 

you seem to be saying that since it is not as dangerous as trad leading, we shouldn't bother. WTF?

 

Where... oh where... did I ever say that?

 

I say that trad leading on granite is practically sport-climbing compared to Rockies limestone, so we're all pussies compared to the folks in Canmore.

 

I don't think anyone is a pussy. I just believe in having the least amount of impact without being wreckless. That is all... where you got this superfluous stuff... I don't know.

[Geek_the_Greek]

It's also as much a matter of convenience and convention.

 

If all you want to do is climb, and you don't care about leading, well, theoretically it would be possible to TR El Cap. Hike to the top, set up an anchor with a 3500 ft. low-stretch (static) rope, rig it with piggy-backed pulley systems giving a total mechanical advantage of 200:1 or so, have a dozen of your friends take care of the belaying while you climb, communicating to them via radio all the while. You wouldn't have to clip any pro, bolts or trad... does that sound like fun?

 

No, the fact is that we tend to climb with ropes between 50 and 70 meters. There are reasons for this, weight is one of them, and history is another. Rock climbing (cragging) used to be training for alpine climbing, then somewhere along the way it became an activity in its own right. Why? Probably because - holy shit! - someone figured it was fun. It's been going on for over 50 years, and I hate to break it to you, but leading is as much a part of it as anything, even if you can hike to the top of the crag. If you're going to question the basic premises of crag climbing, then you might as well ask "why climb at all?"

 

My arguments stem from the fact that if you accept that trad leading on single-pitch, easily-accessible crags (as has been going on in many places for decades) is acceptable, sport leading on single-pitch crags is essentially the same thing. Getting hung up on something like the fact that there are bolts there is focusing on minutiae, and much of the so-called "environmental impact" argument (against the bolts, remember, not the climbing) is bunk.

[willstrickland]

For me, it's a simple cost/benefit. DFA you have laid out the argument that you want 1. Safety 2.To push your self and experience the movement, and 3. To Operate in the "leading" mode.

 

1. Nobody can honestly argue that sport leading is safer than TR (with a few obvious exceptions).

 

2. You are climbing the same moves on TR as on lead.

 

3. This is the only argument left..that you prefer the "traditional ascent mode, i.e. leading".

 

 

So let's do the cost/benefit:

 

Cost: Visual impact, potential to affect access in the future.

 

Benefit: You get to enjoy the fact that you are trailing the rope and risking short and safe falls, rather than having a minimal risk of falling more than a few inches on TR. Leading is often more convenient than setting up a TR.

 

So maybe the real question is: Are there other users of the area who will take offense to the visual impacts and raise the issue with land managers? I can relate a few incidents in the Southeast where hikers raised enough of a ruckus that access was affected.

[Bogen]

Scott, do you honestly feel no different- that is to say have no more or less fun leading a bolted route as opposed to top roping it?

Edited September 29, 2004 by Bogen

[Distel32]

blah blah blah blah blah necessary evil blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

 

 

dude that looks like such a rad route!

[Stefan]

The threat of logging air time in exchange for sequence-botching adds to the experience, for starters. i.e. preservation of an integral part of the original (pre-sport) climbing experience.

 

DFA,

 

When you create a sport route, do you traditionally top rope it to set up the bolts and look for how you want to the route to go?

[RuMR]

 

 

I also should not climb a 5.10 route if I can't climb 5.9

 

if you can't climb 5.9 then you CAN'T climb 5.10! What does mode of protection have to do with it?

 

Ummm. Forgive me for speaking generally but traditionally, the harder routes requires more competence to place protection becuase those routes have less places to place pro. Mode of protection means those more competent can place pro in the more difficult places. Those less competent rely on bolts.

 

again this is bullshit some of the time....i can walk over RIGHT NOW to citypark (5.13c) and seige/hangdog/whine/ etc. up it in complete and utter safety w/ an absolute bomber nut every 1.5 feet...so much for bolts being the only mechanism to climb in shitty style...

[RuMR]

RuMR:

 

What if he just doesn't give a rat's ass about 5.14 climbing? That may be an option...

 

I would like to climb 5.14......but I don't want to spend the time to get there....hence I know I will never get there....

but some folks do want to eventually get to that grade...is it any more necessarily right to impose YOUR style and its corresponding limitations on them as it for them to impose their's on you?

[RuMR]

I would love for all of you, ahem as bob rogoz would eloquently put it, fucking clownpunchers would get on a plane, fly to ceuse or buoux or arco or chateau vert or the verdon...and go climb a few of these bolted wuss routes and then define the french term "engaging" for me...

 

If its a continuous 5.13 crack (like phoenix or trix r 4 kids) it can be hella safer than some limestone routes...any of you fucks ever get a little nervous on 5.12 technical face climbing on greasy shitty holds after climbing harder stuff down lower, pumped out of your mind with 20 feet of air down to the bolt below you and another 15 feet to go? Ahhh that's right, you are all master trad daddies and that is old hat for you...

 

Looks like a lot of talking out of people's asses....the bolting in ceuse/buoux/arco/siurana is hardly what i would call extravagant...

 

And don't bring up ex 38 or some of the other bolt jobbies around here...i agree that they are generally atrocious w/ the amount of bolts on a line...

[RuMR]

The threat of logging air time in exchange for sequence-botching adds to the experience, for starters. i.e. preservation of an integral part of the original (pre-sport) climbing experience.

 

DFA,

 

When you create a sport route, do you traditionally top rope it to set up the bolts and look for how you want to the route to go?

 

not on steep routes like rifle or along the east coast, they are bolted ground up because they are too steep...

[Stefan]

The threat of logging air time in exchange for sequence-botching adds to the experience, for starters. i.e. preservation of an integral part of the original (pre-sport) climbing experience.

 

 

 

DFA,

 

When you create a sport route, do you traditionally top rope it to set up the bolts and look for how you want to the route to go?

 

not on steep routes like rifle or along the east coast, they are bolted ground up because they are too steep...

 

Steep as in overhanging? Or steep as impossible to toprope which is similar in fashion to Smith Rocks?

[RuMR]

60 degrees overhanging or more...the whole freakin way...

[Stefan]

RuMR:

 

What if he just doesn't give a rat's ass about 5.14 climbing? That may be an option...

 

I would like to climb 5.14......but I don't want to spend the time to get there....hence I know I will never get there....

but some folks do want to eventually get to that grade...is it any more necessarily right to impose YOUR style and its corresponding limitations on them as it for them to impose their's on you?

 

I am sure people want to get to that grade. Good for them for putting in the effort and the time!

 

People right now are free to do whatever style they want. Bolting can be done whenever and wherever they want to in these current days (except I think around Indian paintings). I think Smith Rocks/Index are beautiful places to bolt and I have accepted that as okay.

 

And I am sure people want to do it in the sport style rather than do the traditional time learning of pro placement.

 

Here's an analogy for you. I don't want second hand smoke. I avoid smoking areas. I avoid smoking bars. If I go to a park and sit down with my woman, I do not expect to be interrupted by a smoker who comes up and decides to sit next to me. There are areas for smoking and there are areas for nonsmoking. I do not like smoking and wish people would stop, but that choice is up to them.

 

In the end, there will be areas for bolting. There will be areas not allowed for bolting. I do not like bolting, but that choice is up to the user.

 

But how do you stop someone from bolting in a nonbolting area? You cannot. Once you bolt in a nonbolting area that is permanent (geologic time will remove the bolt). Besides I think bolting where people cannot see it is okay with me. I don't like, I just accept it.

[scott_harpell]

RuMR:

 

What if he just doesn't give a rat's ass about 5.14 climbing? That may be an option...

 

I would like to climb 5.14......but I don't want to spend the time to get there....hence I know I will never get there....

but some folks do want to eventually get to that grade...is it any more necessarily right to impose YOUR style and its corresponding limitations on them as it for them to impose their's on you?

 

gain this is bullshit some of the time....i can walk over RIGHT NOW to citypark (5.13c) and seige/hangdog/whine/ etc. up it in complete and utter safety w/ an absolute bomber nut every 1.5 feet...so much for bolts being the only mechanism to climb in shitty style...

 

I would say there is some contradiction there....

[scott_harpell]

If all you want to do is climb, and you don't care about leading, well, theoretically it would be possible to TR El Cap.

 

No... it really isn't

[scott_harpell]

I hate to break it to you, but leading is as much a part of it as anything, even if you can hike to the top of the crag. If you're going to question the basic premises of crag climbing, then you might as well ask "why climb at all?"

 

That is why I don't as a rule do these climbs. As you say, I just don't see the point, but if you do...the question I ask you is: Why not set up a TR is possible.

[scott_harpell]

Getting hung up on something like the fact that there are bolts there is focusing on minutiae, and much of the so-called "environmental impact" argument (against the bolts, remember, not the climbing) is bunk.

 

If that is the case... then why is everyone over there shitting on Subaru about the bolts they placed?

[Geek_the_Greek]

But it's just convention, right? I mean there's no law out there that says we have to use 200 ft ropes. For instance, Castle Rock (11worth) is fully topropable. All you need is a 400 ft. rope. 7 mm should be strong enough for TR falls, and that would keep the weight down to a manageable level. Set your anchor, rap down while uncoiling the vast amounts of thin line along the right route, and bingo, a 3-pitch high toprope. Man, that sounds great!

 

Personally, I'd rather lead it.

[John Frieh]

Because bolting isn't black and white... its appropriateness varies situation to situation. Most people feel a 6 bolt anchor is to much.

 

Bolts are okay if you can’t naturally protect the route. Done.

[Geek_the_Greek]

The "shitting" is indeed part of the problem. The power-drills (a valid assumption) is another part. And retro-bolting a common hike/walk-off is a third. I'll grant you that preserving historic precedent can be a valid reason.

[willstrickland]

get on a plane, fly to ceuse or buoux or arco or chateau vert or the verdon...and go climb a few of these bolted wuss routes ...

the bolting in ceuse/buoux/arco/siurana is hardly what i would call extravagant...

And don't bring up ex 38 or some of the other bolt jobbies around here...i agree that they are generally atrocious w/ the amount of bolts on a line...

 

I don't get where you're going with this Rudy? We don't live in France, and from what I've seen of the crags you mention, they aren't readily top-ropeable anyway with the exception of the pitches just below the rim in the Verdon. I think bringing up E38 is more valid than some crags halfway around the world. And, yes, the people I know who've climbed in the Verdon reported some "adventurous" runouts. But widely spaced bolts where there is no other protection available, on a crag that is not TR-able isn't really the issue is it? Maybe I am missing something.