soulreaper Posted August 9, 2005 Share Posted August 9, 2005 I know the move that he's talking about. The exit from the slot is tricky and is protected by a fixed pin w/mank sling. However, protection in the corner seems decent. Tom, congratulations on doing the route in bold style. Please leave it as is for those of us who also wish to pursue that style. Andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter_Puget Posted August 10, 2005 Share Posted August 10, 2005 Rereading his post you may be right about the location, however, for me at least, the pro is goofier a bit higher. You get a good piece right just above the slot and then move up and right engaging the roof. Right there if you fell you could swing back left a bit and slam into the v-slot. The piece needs a long sling to be stable. The moves are also a bit committing. At least that's my memory of it. This section is where I was assuming he was wishing for a bolt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwalling Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 Adding bolts... is just plain old stupid! I can tell you that it is by sheer luck that the bolts are still on Numbah Ten and Snow White this week. I had a buddy who was just up here and was going to chop them but they raged too much to get the job done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 so...can your selfrighteous buddy do these climbs with or without the bolts? or is he just climbing on his soapbox to spray you and himself??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwalling Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 He could not free them that is for sure! But obviously the people who put the bolts in can't free the real climb either. They had to bolt it, to bring it down to their level. There is plenty of hard aid pitches that could be freed... but it would be insane without bolts. So should we go and bolt all those too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 You are pretty much talking out of your ass as you don't know the folks from that generation...MaxD, JimP, and AndyD and the folks from that era were pretty competent as far as crackclimbing go...Those routes were bolted to preserve the free climbing nature of them......Numba10 is actually the start to mandala (the all bolted arete above)... This is the problem with somebody who steps in and views a climbing area as a snapshot in time w/o a sense of the history of the area...and its even more ridiculuous when its a visitor... You oughta tell your buddy to not run his piehole off soo much...it makes him and you look like tools.... Darryl Cramer can give a little more light on the history... Regarding insane hard aid...well, if it can go free and its worth it, i don't see a problem with bolts...my opinion...yours are likely different... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwalling Posted August 11, 2005 Share Posted August 11, 2005 Well if these guys are so rad because they chip and bolt existing climbs then cool I chip head placements and enchant hooks. Rudy, don't get me wrong I love bolts! I own a power drill and a couple hand drills. I just don't like added bolts. I'm not the one who plans on ever chopping them. My buddy what done Show White on aid before and the came to do it another day and found that a bunch of it had been bolted. It sucks to have a climb you enjoy bolted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Those routes were bolted to preserve the free climbing nature of them......Numba10 is actually the start to mandala (the all bolted arete above)... Huh? We're supposed to believe that a bolt trail is somehow more attractive than a few pin scars? Somehow, Numbah Ten is more aesthetic with a mess of bolts? That climb aids cleanly and is 5.11 climbing except for maybe one move. Too bad folks weren't patient enough to free it on gear. I don't buy the idea that a trail of bolts "saves the rock" and I don't think that's the primary motivation in bolting a line like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thinker Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Where's Marty when you need him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancegranite Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 ...and a drilled pocket feels just like a pin scar. Index was a gravel pit. Every climb at Index was completely excavated, scrubbed, trundled,toproped, preprotected, pinned out and then "sent in good style". ohhhhhh! the majesty! It's really hard to take this seriously from a outside standpoint... we just jook like a bunch of wierdos prancing around, telling each other how to live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 I think you should be careful if you are suggesting that “the guy who placed the bolt by definition couldn’t climb the route without it.” That may be so in this instance, but I don’t see that anybody is actually saying they know that is true here. I'm not much familiar with the history of route development or redevelopment at Index but, with one or two exceptions, virtually every case of retrobolting that I know about was undertaken by someone who actually could and did lead the route without the added bolt or bolts before they added them. I don’t know about the bolts on Numbah Ten, and I’m not arguing that they should stay or go. I agree with Pope’s statements elsewhere that every bolt placement should be given careful thought and I would hope anybody who would undertake to bring about any change in the bolting at Index asks a lot of questions before they do so. Would your friend, Mr. Walling, assert that there should never be a case where a bolt is added to a line that can be done by somebody without it? What other factors might play into the discussion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 ...and a drilled pocket feels just like a pin scar. Index was a gravel pit. ......we just jook like a bunch of wierdos prancing around, telling each other how to live. Right, Index is vertical garbage, pressed pig shit, not worth fussing about when somebody decides to add their own "contribution". Let's not get bent out of shape when this guy shows up: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 ...and a drilled pocket feels just like a pin scar. Index was a gravel pit. Every climb at Index was completely excavated, scrubbed, trundled,toproped, preprotected, pinned out and then "sent in good style". ohhhhhh! the majesty! It's really hard to take this seriously from a outside standpoint... we just jook like a bunch of wierdos prancing around, telling each other how to live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Once again, you recycle a worn out joke Mr. Pope. Nobody is talking about developing Index in the style that you portray and I am fairly sure that even the pure among us would generally agree that there is no comparison between the climbing at Index and a via ferratta. Under what circmustances might it be acceptable to add a bolt to a climb that somebody has previously completed without it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Once again, you recycle a worn out joke Mr. Pope. It's not funny. I am fairly sure that even the pure among us would generally agree that there is no comparison between the climbing at Index and a via ferratta. I look at Numbah Ten and then the via ferratta pasted into this thread and I see... 1. A bunch of shiny stuff that don't belong on da rock. 2. A bunch of shiny stuff that forms a trail. 3. A cliff that is easier to climb in its altered state. 4. A cliff is that is safer to climb in its altered state. 5. Both modifications are difficult to view on a sunny day without sun glasses. 6. A bunch of smug little fuckers who probably wouldn't come near those walls if it weren't for all of the engineering/aids. Now I'm struggling to contrast the two. Under what circmustances might it be acceptable to add a bolt to a climb that somebody has previously completed without it? Well, up on Lundin Peak one can find belay/protection bolts with enormous, home-made, pear-shaped hangers. These, I assume, were added to the 3rd-class ridge climb at the same time as a plaque that marks the point where a Boe-Alps instructor slipped to his doom. Virtually every climber I saw the day I checked it out was happy to clip the bolts. Maybe a few of them would have appreciated a hand rail as well. When a climb gets done without bolts, I can't see how adding bolts is ever justified (except maybe at a belay on a popular climb). I don't think it is our job to alter the rock with the goal of increasing traffic, rescuing lost classics, or making rock climbing safer/easier for wide consumption. There is no shortage of safe, easy, heavily-altered, bolt-dependent climbing available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 i pretty much agree with you except if the route was protected with pins...then i see no difference between a bolt and a pin...both are fixed (fine, you can pull the pin, but the scar is as ugly or more than the hole from when a bolt is removed) plus a scar changes the actual climbing...with enough scarring you have a jug and a nice placement...so no diff ethically... you sure like beating your chest...doesn't it hurt??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
E-rock Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Virtually every climber I saw the day I checked it out was happy to clip the bolts. So what...? You spend your days in the mountains surveying other people's attitudes towards fixed gear. Jesus christ you're obsessed! I suppose none of those people would have been there if it weren't for those bolts you described right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Virtually every climber I saw the day I checked it out was happy to clip the bolts. So what...? You spend your days in the mountains surveying other people's attitudes towards fixed gear. Jesus christ you're obsessed! I suppose none of those people would have been there if it weren't for those bolts you described right? No, that ridge probably had hundreds of ascents before the fixed gear was added. It's 3rd class. Probably most of the climbers on this board would say that because the route is so easy, it doesn't need bolts. Yet you can find scramblers who are belaying and happy to clip these enormously intrusive fixtures. I didn't survey anybody, I just noticed that practically everybody was using them. I suggest that if somebody were to drag up Lundin a few bags of ready-mix and some cable, the addition of cement steps and a hand rail would be welcome by many happy hikers. Previously unwilling to haul ropes and risk technical terrain, these hikers would suddenly find Lundin's summit attainable. Traffic would increase. Somebody would add a sit start. I think that in mountaineering and rock climbing, we should let the terrain dictate the difficulty and available protection. Matt asked under what conditions it might be acceptable to add bolts to an established climb. Many will pick out a climb like Dan's Dreadful Direct and say that because it's dangerous, dirty and hard, adding bolts is appropriate. But why lower the standard to make the route more user-friendly? How is that so different than what we now have on Lundin Peak? I thought standards were increasing, what with the new, intrepid attitudes and such. Why do we need to make easier routes like Iron Horse? Cannot the young upstarts equal the heroic deeds of yesterday's icons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 (edited) I understand how Rumr feels. Poop makes some post that is clearly hyperbole, and thus Rumr responds in kind. Poop might have something to say worth listening to regarding bolts, but the tactics he uses render him worthy of no response other than what Rumr said. It would be nice to see a serious debate regarding bolting in WA state. There are a lot of overbolted routes. The problem is that the anti bolt side doesn't want to take the effort to make a serious argument. God damn it Eric you've got a fucking Phd in math; therefore you can argue logically, but you're too fucking lazy to bother when it comes to bolting. Maybe you really don't care that much about rock/climbing. Edit: I missed the post that Ian was talking about, but after reading it I still don't see why Rudy should take Eric seriously. It's not about 1 post; its about your posting pattern. Edited August 13, 2005 by AlpineK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra_Commander Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 Don't get me wrong I'm not suggesting the pope has not been antagonizing, but simply, it was at least post with some cogent points rather than obscure photos from who knows where. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 quit deleting my frickin' posts, mods!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottP Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 (Soon to be deleted too...) MY point is that you will never reach compromise with an idiot...so why bother...he completely avoided my arguments about pins vs. bolts with a circumnavigating post....so fine...he gets a big ol' fuck off/you....you can have one too as i have a whole case of 'em right here... Yeah, its emotional and yeah its reactionary...so what's your fucking point??? My point is... Hyperbole is relatively easy to circumvent in a reasoned discussion. With some thought, the main points of an argument can be separated from it. Emotional, reactionary responses don't allow for that and stall the process of argumentation, making it a pointless exercise. You choose to debate Pope and then you resort to such tactics when things get tough. If he avoids your points, repeat them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 This whole freaking website is a joke/pointless exercise...you think it represents anything other than some yahoos bored at work????? Poop didn't choose to debate back...go read through the thread... PS: don't tell me how to argue/debate...i really give a fuck what pope thinks...or you for that matter... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pope Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 ...he completely avoided my arguments about pins vs. bolts with a circumnavigating post i pretty much agree with you except if the route was protected with pins etc. etc. Nobody suggested pins are better than bolts (although I believe they are). A route like Numbah Ten aids on nuts. Many of those slots (#2 RP if I recall) were created by pins. I think the route could be climbed free with RP protection now (even if rap placed) and it would be ten times the accomplishment that it now is. The trail of bolts leading up that climb is in no way an improvement on the pin scars that make nutting possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted August 13, 2005 Share Posted August 13, 2005 Alright, I clipped off the part where the topic becomes "who's an asshole" and sent that to Spray. There's some serious disagreement here, and yeah, personality conflict too, but let's try and stick to the topic at hand and be somewhat adult about it. Personally, I think Pope's argument about Numbah 10 = that via ferrata in the picture is a flamboyant over-the-top troll, but that doesn't make him insincere. The bit where he states that he sees no reason to ever add a bolt to a climb anywhere, aside from a belay improvement, is as I understand it, his core belief. Do I read you right Pope? Personally, I think that is a fundamentalist position, not traditional at all. The idea that climbing is all about cheating death, and that the purest climbs are those where all but the most skilled are sure (and deserve) to die is revisionist malarky. Poorly protected death routes are often either a product of the technology available at the time of the first ascent, or a product of overly inflated ego. With regards to the free climb (with bolts) versus aid climb, I think the much lauded lions of yesteryear who popularized clean climbing (Choinard, Robinson, etc) also believed that free climbing was superior to aid climbing, especially nailing. Anyway, as I said, I think Pope's position is fundamentalist, a call for a return to an interpretation of the founding principles of the sport. I suppose one could argue that the 1972 Chouinard Catalog constitutes the new testatment of his faith. Non-religious fundamentalism Some refer to any literal-minded or intolerant philosophy with pretense of being the sole source of objective truth, as fundamentalist, regardless of whether it is usually called a religion. For example, when Albania under Enver Hoxha declared itself an "atheist state", it was deemed by some to be a kind of "Fundamentalist Atheism" or more accurately "Stalinist Fundamentalism". There are people who in their attempt to live according to the writings of Ayn Rand seem to detractors to transgress respect for other perspectives in propagating their views, so that they are deemed to be a kind of "Objectivist Fundamentalist", and they are spoken of derogatorily as, "Randroids." In France, the imposition of restrictions on public display of religion has been labelled by some as "Secular Fundamentalism." The idea of non-religious Fundamentalism almost always expands the definition of "Fundamentalism" along the lines of criticisms. Occasionally, it represents an idea of purity, and is self-applied as signifying a rather counter-cultural fidelity to some noble, simple, but overlooked principle, as in Economic fundamentalism; but the same term can be used in a critical way. Fundamentalists believe their cause to have grave and even cosmic importance. They see themselves as protecting not only a distinctive doctrine, but also a vital principle, and a way of life and of salvation. The fundamentalist "wall of virtue", which protects their identity, is erected against not only alien religions, but also against the modernized, compromised, nominal version of their own religion. Hence, you won't "win" an argument with him if you don't believe as he does. This is getting too long winded, I gotta go. I'll blab about my own liberal tradition some other time. Or not... Wikipedia on "fundamentalisim" is my quote source. 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.