JosephH Posted August 20, 2005 Share Posted August 20, 2005 "then its your responsibility to make it safe..." Not sure if I could disagree more completely... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flashclimber Posted August 20, 2005 Share Posted August 20, 2005 Ok..A few things before I leave on vacation....Cunning Stunt/Snake Dike Reference...I was trying to say that even 30 years or more ago people were thinking about the safety of a route that could become very popular. Making a route safe the masses will most likely be trying, should be a concern of the FA. To those FA's who put up 5.8 X and R rated routes...Well I say dont bother taking credit. If your looking for the adreniline high...go put up a 5.12 X and get all taste in your mouth you need (just watch the guy in Front Line Freaks, I don think he expects anyone to ever repeat his route)...But if you put up a 5.8 - 5.10 route which has death written all over it...well that falls on your head. No matter if you say "Well dont climb it duh." Remember, its public land...and people will be climbing on it. Climbing should have some risks...however gumbies are looking for any route below a 5.10 and will most likely get on ur "piece of crap route." I have climbed up at Static Point and I find the 50 foot runoutes there, very reasonable...Yes it will hurt if you slide..but the fall most likely wont kill you...Taking a 200 foot slide on a "piece of crap route" actually might send u into tumble that will likely cause you serious injury or even death. That's why I had put up the reference to Snake Dike earlier. They went back and added a few bolts to make it safer. Cunning Stunt was also retro-bolted. Maybe it didn't need that many bolts, but if you fall from the expanding flake, and have a piece of gear behind the flake, chances are that it will become permanently lodged there. Im more worried about the ingrity of the rock than the actual danger of the fall. My reference to 24 hour Bucaneer...I dont know if you have been on the route or not...But it could be nice Index 11b test piece if it didn't have the R rating. A new pin and a bolt just under the mantle would save you from a ground fall. Just my 2 cents. Its a calculated risk Im not willing to take when there are so many 11's I'd rather climb at Index. I guess it doesn't matter if you are the FA or not...Someone will always come along later and "enhance" your route with bolts, pin scars, or other means. But if I put up a route that I knew could kill someone because I was to lazy, cheap, or looking for a high, I'd make the proper changes to correct it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 21, 2005 Share Posted August 21, 2005 exactly...its a calculated risk...and as you said, there are many more 11's that are safer to go climb...i sound like pope, but not everything needs to be sanitized...so "dont climb it duh." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 "Making a route safe the masses will most likely be trying, should be a concern of the FA." Again, I couldn't possibly disagree more. As far as I'm concerned a person putting up an FA should just be completely obsessed with a potential route and do as it comes to him or her for their own sake. "Community Service" and "Development" in the context of FA's are just grotesque and concepts escaped from the confines of gym coursesetting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 bravo! well put... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 As far as I'm concerned a person putting up an FA should just be completely obsessed with a potential route and do as it comes to him or her for their own sake. "Community Service" and "Development" in the context of FA's are just grotesque and concepts escaped from the confines of gym coursesetting. I'm not following you here. I see your post is entered in response to the statement about making routes safe for the masses, but are you saying that every butcher that ever owned a hatchet, hammer and a drill ought go wail away on our crags with no regard for what anybody else might think? Starting as early as 1948, climbers in Washington took it upon themselves to put up new rotues, "develop" crags and undertake trail projects, cleanups and other "service projects" with an eye toward future visitors. Overall, I think we've benefitted from that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 (edited) no, matt, what he is saying is that if you put up a route, do it for yourself, in the manner you see fit and don't worry about others... I personally agree with him, in part, because i'm sick of the TeamREI phenomenon that is replicating a gym experience outside instead of the other way around... New people have never acquired one necessary "skill" that i believe is imperative for outside climbing...ie, being able to judge, for themselves, just how much risk they should take vs. how skilled they are at two things a.) protection and b.) climbing skills... Go to a place like newhalem and you will see what i'm talking about...its GROSS!! Jeezus some sport areas make the gym look runout!! Whatever happened to our sport??? Christ, when i started it would be inconceivable to actually sue someone over rockclimbing...now, its a real concern...and its because of this gym/REI phenomenon of getting everyone and their brother into it... AND YOU KNOW WHERE I STAND WITH REGARDS TO IDIOTZ LIKE POPE/DWAYNER, but they do have their point... Edited August 22, 2005 by RuMR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Grid bolt Earth. We'll get the other planets later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 My reference to 24 hour Bucaneer...I dont know if you have been on the route or not...But it could be nice Index 11b test piece if it didn't have the R rating. A new pin and a bolt just under the mantle would save you from a ground fall. Not falling will also save you from a ground fall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 RuMR, I'm with you if what you are suggesting is that you'd like to see a variety of climbing opportunities maintained and, if you are thinking that "worrying about others" means grid bolting everything or whatever, then I'm with you on that point too. However, I think putting up routes at crags is NOT something that one should do just for their own personal satisfaction with no regard for how others may react or what their experience on our climbs may be. And I think this includes consdering what our new masterpiece will add to the area, whether it may cause this or that problem, etc. in addition to the "safety" factor we seem to be focussed on here. If "that guy's" manner that he saw fit was to bolt gym holds on a line at Index Lower Town Wall, I bet you'd be critical, right? Yes, that is an absurd example -- but is it? There are climbers who would think it was OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 point taken...although a runout death route has far less eyesore potential than your hypothetical situation... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 right, because moss is beautiful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwrts Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 point taken...although a runout death route has far less eyesore potential than your hypothetical situation... AND: right, because moss is beautiful. now we are getting somewhere in this bantering typefest. Keep It Simple Stupid (cidiot) Words to fukin live by... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 22, 2005 Share Posted August 22, 2005 shutup ben... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 And at that I bid all you people a farewell. This site is so unbelievably riteous I can not seriously offer any more beta. I am sure many of you will give a shout of joy... one less ranting asshole with an overopionated arrogant attitude, now we call can sing and be peaceful little cascadeclimbers. Have fun, back questionable pro/raps up, watch out for falling rocks and NO MORE BOLTS NEXT TO CRACKS!!!!!!!!!!!! Ben I thought you were going away. My view is that if the crux pitch of a route is 5.11 then bolts should be placed so that someone who leads at that grade will feel more or less comfortable. The hard pitches may require a number of bolts, but the 5.7 pitch leading to the hard bits should be run out. Also no bolts next to cracks that you can reasonably protect. I can see why Gorilla my dreams has bolts, and I can see why a pitch with thin expanding flakes might require bolts, but there's a ton of stuff out there that can be naturally protected yet it has bolts right next to cracks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bwrts Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 And at that I bid all you people a farewell. This site is so unbelievably riteous I can not seriously offer any more beta. I am sure many of you will give a shout of joy... one less ranting asshole with an overopionated arrogant attitude, now we call can sing and be peaceful little cascadeclimbers. Have fun, back questionable pro/raps up, watch out for falling rocks and NO MORE BOLTS NEXT TO CRACKS!!!!!!!!!!!! Ben I thought you were going away. My view is that if the crux pitch of a route is 5.11 then bolts should be placed so that someone who leads at that grade will feel more or less comfortable. The hard pitches may require a number of bolts, but the 5.7 pitch leading to the hard bits should be run out. Also no bolts next to cracks that you can reasonably protect. I can see why Gorilla my dreams has bolts, and I can see why a pitch with thin expanding flakes might require bolts, but there's a ton of stuff out there that can be naturally protected yet it has bolts right next to cracks. kurt, your ability to dig into the bowels of cc.com is impressive, I guess. That was that dumb pollock szyjakowski who said that....now wasn't it? This is the new nicer me. Hold back the applause. "bwrts" is my initials so anyone who thinks I hide behind some dumb avatar name can take back that thought. "szyjakowski" was an old family name so whatever....and btw, you are right Kurt, I do care about how the rock and nature is mistreated by people who think they own the world and do whatever they think is right for them...ya know people kinda like the idiot in the whitehouse. Bolts next to cracks are gay and fukin pathetic. If you so feel the rock must be climbed even with hard to protect crack, then Top Rope the peyotch. Otherwise stick your drill up your ass and go home. Rudy===>> FO!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattp Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 bwrts, you post under what is to anybody else a nondescript set of letters and there is no personal information whatsoever in your user profile. In fact, you ARE using an anonymous profile. There's no problem with that - it is perfectly "legit" on cc.com, but you have failed to provide any identity or contact info whatsoever. For anybody who doesn't know who you are based on an obsession with cc.com, you have either actively or passively chosen to be anonymous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazyjizzy Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 bwrts, you post under what is to anybody else a nondescript set of letters and there is no personal information whatsoever in your user profile. In fact, you ARE using an anonymous profile. There's no problem with that - it is perfectly "legit" on cc.com, but you have failed to provide any identity or contact info whatsoever. For anybody who doesn't know who you are based on an obsession with cc.com, you have either actively or passively chosen to be anonymous. What?...in English And Ben, your new avatar took absolutely no time for myself, Rolf, Kurt, or Rudy to figure out, like 5 seconds! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 And at that I bid all you people a farewell. This site is so unbelievably riteous I can not seriously offer any more beta. I am sure many of you will give a shout of joy... one less ranting asshole with an overopionated arrogant attitude, now we call can sing and be peaceful little cascadeclimbers. Have fun, back questionable pro/raps up, watch out for falling rocks and NO MORE BOLTS NEXT TO CRACKS!!!!!!!!!!!! Ben I thought you were going away. My view is that if the crux pitch of a route is 5.11 then bolts should be placed so that someone who leads at that grade will feel more or less comfortable. The hard pitches may require a number of bolts, but the 5.7 pitch leading to the hard bits should be run out. Also no bolts next to cracks that you can reasonably protect. I can see why Gorilla my dreams has bolts, and I can see why a pitch with thin expanding flakes might require bolts, but there's a ton of stuff out there that can be naturally protected yet it has bolts right next to cracks. kurt, your ability to dig into the bowels of cc.com is impressive, I guess. That was that dumb pollock szyjakowski who said that....now wasn't it? This is the new nicer me. Hold back the applause. "bwrts" is my initials so anyone who thinks I hide behind some dumb avatar name can take back that thought. "szyjakowski" was an old family name so whatever....and btw, you are right Kurt, I do care about how the rock and nature is mistreated by people who think they own the world and do whatever they think is right for them...ya know people kinda like the idiot in the whitehouse. Bolts next to cracks are gay and fukin pathetic. If you so feel the rock must be climbed even with hard to protect crack, then Top Rope the peyotch. Otherwise stick your drill up your ass and go home. Rudy===>> FO!! ahh...i'm touched! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashw_justin Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 ok let me just make sure I'm following. Taking pride in inadequate protection. fucking retarded. Blaming your inadequacy on inadequate protection. fucking retarded. Amount of protection on any given route: obviously, simply subject to prevailing opinion of the climber community. Did I miss anything? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottP Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 I've done a literal handful of first ascents of crag-like routes, and those I've done weren't on popular crags. My partners and I spent the time trying to do the routes in a style that befit our abilities, with little regard for what future parties would experience. A route I was part of putting up has since been retrobolted. At the time we didn't think this step-across move was that hard, just thought provoking. Others disagreed, asked permission, got it and now there's a bolt at the mental crux of the route. I guess the point I am trying to make is that in some cases, first ascents aren't for anybody but the first ascenders. On a popular/accessible crag you have to expect that what you clean and install will get used. If you're the FA and the courteous sort, you'll take that into account, but it's hardly an obligation. What others do after is pretty much out of your control anyway, so there's no point bitching about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 My view is that if the crux pitch of a route is 5.11 then bolts should be placed so that someone who leads at that grade will feel more or less comfortable. Yet another extremely peculiar and highly socialized statement from my perspective - obviously a sport conversation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JosephH Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Taking pride in inadequate protection. fucking retarded. Blaming your inadequacy on inadequate protection. fucking retarded. A shared concept of "adequacy" is at the heart of the problem and no doubt as the number of people that help define it goes up you can be assured the number of bolts to attain it will rise along with them. Amount of protection on any given route: obviously, simply subject to prevailing opinion of the climber community. "prevailing opinion" - pretty much sums up the future of grid bolting as [generations of] gym climbers righteously demand "adequate" protection (and "safe climbing") while they seek to [assbackwardly] emulate their indoor clipping experience outdoors. Did I miss anything? Yes - first off I'd say clearly delineating the distinction between sport/bolted FA's and trad/mixed FA's. When putting up a sport/bolted FA then you are making permanent decisions for everyone relative to fixed protection placements. It's inherently a completely different deal than a staight trad FA. Some "consideration" and careful thought should go into a sport/bolted FA as it is such a premeditated affair to begin with. That said, any intelligent and "sporting" climber wouldn't drive the "sport" out of a route simply to bring it down to the lowest common denominator for mass consumption and comfort - that just makes it another outdoor gym route. Too sporty and it's posing, not sporty enough and it's pandering - such is the sporting man's dilemna... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashw_justin Posted August 23, 2005 Share Posted August 23, 2005 Ok so what set of criteria defines: safe enough? a? no groundfalls, if falling from a crux; but you might get hurt of you're a dumbass and fall off the easy part. b? no groundfalls, period. (assuming competent belayer) c? no groundfalls period, and no fall greater than 30 feet (15-foot bolt spacing) d? no groundfalls period, and 10-foot bolt spacing. (common) Also I don't know if it's been said, but anyone who is too much of a puss to accept the risk of leading on pro that may inadequate, should feel perfectly comfortable top roping... leading a grade isn't about having your hand held so you can be proud of yourself, it's about mastering a grade to point that you know that you will not fall. Fuck redpoint-fests. If you can't lead it without falling then toprope it until you can. 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.