INFLATION!....Where's Greenspan when you need him?

[still_climbin]

I view climbing from an unusual vantage. I did most of my climbing (all of the hard stuff) in the late 60's thru early 80's. Then, after having a couble children, we relented to hikes, srcambles and anything I could get away with on skiis...Kid compatible stuff. A few years ago my son became interested in rock climbing (with no encouragement from me mind you). One day while at our cabin near Leavenworth he asked if I'd take a few hours to belay him on the Icicle. I agreed, reaffirming my unwillingness to do any more climbing myself. Well, that lasted about 10 minutes.....TOTAL RELAPS!! I now scramble around on those rocks like a crab.

 

Eighteen years off gets one out of touch with changes in the sport. Lots of changes I discovered were good like rock shoes and cams. But one change baffles me... inflation of difficulty ratings that's occured over the years.

 

I decided to do an experiment. I chose half a dozen rock climbs, some easy and some hard, that were popular in 1970 and are equally popular now. I've climbed them all, some many times. I dug out my old climber's guides, my climbing journal and bought some of the new guides. I compared rating of various pitches on those climbs and the results are shown in the ATTACHED TABLE.

 

Here's what I conclude:

 

- Ratings of 5.1 thru 5.4 have virtually disappeared and moves of that difficulty have pretty much been promoted to 5.5 to 5.7.

- Higher ratings 5.8 to 5.9 have shown less (but not zero) inflation.

- Ratings of the "famous" crux move on famous routes, like the 5.9 finger travers on the third pitch of Outer Space, have tended to stick, but other moves on the same route have inflated.

- Have the routes become more difficult? I've repeated some of these climbs recently and don't think so. In fact the tolal absence of moss and scale and the use of modern shoes makes them easier if anything... And it also seems that just when you think it would be nice to set a belay, presto!... there's a couple big herky bolts right there!

 

Comments?

555470-EWGRouteComparrisonRev1.doc

Edited March 15, 2006 by still_climbin

[matt_m]

This post has a lot of flame potential but regardless, here we go...

 

You don't see a lot of 5.5 and under in the west coast - The rock doesn't really "allow" it. The gunks have tons in that range because of its horizontal nature. My guess is that over the years since you last climbed - people visited more areas and isolation grades started to disappear as climbers saw what was truly "easy" fifth class. The 5.8 and 5.9 grades of the "classic" era are LOADED with grade debates. Basically, climbers started to push difficulty more and more but really didn't know how much harder the new climb was than that old 5.7 and since, for a while anyway, 5.9 was the limit - things just got called 5.9 It's a well know fact these days that when you climb at and "older" area on "old" climbs you should be VERY wary of the 5.8+ or 5.9+ ratings - they could be MUCH harder (Modern Times at 5.8+ in the gunks is a CLASSIC example). Are grades softer in some areas? Yes. Climbers can and will argue till times end that the older stuff was harder and the newer stuff is over rated - I just climb it and say "old school 5.8" or 5.8 and move on.

 

RE: Bolts at belay stances - This is loaded with heat and debate and many will get so worked up about it that you'll soon have 10 pages of rants about ethics or old timers not keeping up, convenience vs solid anchor skills etc etc. Frankly, unless the bolted belay is so offensive to the local ethics and practices (like porn, most know when they see it but opinions vary in amsterdam vs salt lake) that is causes a mass climber riot - its a personal issue: choose to climb the route or don't.

 

 

Looking at your table - OS P3 start - Org says 5.8 and depending on which way you go (left is 5.8 rt is 5.9) the grade will vary - Smoot isn't clear on this but i think it's accurate. P3 traverse? stays at 5.9 thought the years but I believe some of that flake that gives you footholds has broken off over the years - when that breaks off more the grade will go up. Pedestal varies with which way you go hence the grade variations. Crack - the moves off library ledge give the pitch it's grade IMO - everything above that first 15 feet is easier. Angel - this sucker has gotten seriously polished over the years and has had a lot of erosion at the base - grade creep do to wear and tear? Midway can be attributed to the age of the route, same thing for saber I'd guess - 5.3 should be easy for almost anyone... Classic crack - "old school rating" I'd leave it old school because, well it is.

Edited March 15, 2006 by matt_m

[chucK]

One reason the Outer Space traverse rating may not have changed much is because it's a "benchmark" climb for the area isn't it? It's listed in the Beckey Guide description of ratings I believe.

 

I don't know how this works in, but another factor could be the "wiring" factor, when you're talking about rating specific pitches. Once you've done a pitch a time or three, you usually work out the kinks and it's a lot easier. When this happens to a benchmark pitch like the Outer Space traverse a grader might not hold quite the high regard for "5.9" anymore. Then when he gets on a new pitch that is still somewhat unfamiliar, he might think, this is harder than O.S. so it must be 5.10.

[G-spotter]

still climbin you aren't the first to notice this by a longshot

 

http://home.primus.ca/~dooley/climbing/stories/squishgrade.html

[still_climbin]

I think your right on the "benchmark" aspect. In ~1970 routes like Midway were held up as "benchmarks" for 5.4 and they were discussed as such. If a new route was a little harder maybe it was rated 5.5, a little easier 5.3. Now I think perhaps benchmarks climbers relate to are in the harder clases, 5.8 and up. Not as much attention is given to the lower grades. Hence you don't hear climbers reigning in ratings by saying "this climb is like Midway, therefore its 5.4."

 

I also agree with the comment on "old school" 5.9 or 5.9+ ratings. That used to be the top of the scale and for most climbers that meant it was above their ability. Just how far above wasn't important.

[still_climbin]

G-Spot, did you notice that the photo on your link is of one of us old guys climbing the first moves on Angel Crack?

[G-spotter]

Really, is that what it is? I thought it was Dave Graham cranking out his new 15a

[underworld]

looks like renton

[mattp]

I think Midway and Angel crack HAVE gotten harder, but I'm not so sure about the others.

[Johnny_Tuff]

Oh, dear God! Not grade inflation at the 5.2 to 5.9 level! What happens when some poor noob thinks they can handle 5.4, only to be shut down on some more honestly-graded 5.3? This must be stopped. STOPPED, I SAY!

 

Meanwhile, many sport route grades are getting compressed, robbing many of us of the coveted numbers we thirst for. The Quickening is .12c, Monkey Boy is .12b, Rude Boys is .13a/b...how are you supposed to spray up your resume, or even keep up your motivation to project shit if all the goods keep getting devalued?! This is a serious matter. Grade inflation is good for the ego; grade compression kills.

[Peter_Puget]

Don't get me started about grade inflation. Years ago Squamish ratings were the standard and now they are about two grades lower. Drives a guy crazy.

[matt_m]

Don't get me started about grade inflation. Years ago Squamish ratings were the standard and now they are about two grades lower. Drives a guy crazy.

Squam ratings are all over the place I've done 10s that were STOUT and 10s that were soft -same for 9s and 11s.

[MisterMo]

For the routes that are not trivialities one might think that sticky shoes and modern pro should have made them easier, as you state, not harder. On the other hand I can tootle over to 8 mile, drag my aging fat ass up Classic (which I've got wired for life I'm pretty sure) and delude myself that I'm not a brakeman on the Lazy, No Pep, and Wobbly...and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

Not too far off topic, a bit of related silliness was (and apparently still is) the whole measure-your-dick BS about certain areas having "harder" or "easier" ratings. Once upon a time Peshastin gradings were oft said to be a point or two on the "easy" side and climbs up at Squamish were couple of points off the other way. An excellent and enduring essay on the topic is Bridwells "The Innocent, the Ignorant, and the Insecure" in an old Ascent. An excellent commment in there about how asinine it would be if everybody's watches kept time at a different pace...

[Peter_Puget]

Not too far off topic, a bit of related silliness was (and apparently still is) the whole measure-your-dick BS about certain areas having "harder" or "easier" ratings. Once upon a time Peshastin gradings were oft said to be a point or two on the "easy" side and climbs up at Squamish were couple of points off the other way.

 

An (early?) 60's Squamish guide rated climbs about 2 grades lower than routes in Yosemite. It took awhile for the ratings to be adjusted. Those interested can go to the Mounty library and research the matter themselves, although the link provided earlier will provide supporting evidence. In latter publications this error was noted. The point I was making was simply that ratings were not so consistent in the past either.

[Billygoat]

Doesn't it all just really have to do with how you're feeling that day?

[MisterMo]

G-Spot, did you notice that the photo on your link is of one of us old guys climbing the first moves on Angel Crack?

 

That is one of several photos that hung on the wall of Shelton's Cafe (Hotel Tyrol)in Leavenworth in the late sixties. Don't recall/never knew who took them; interesting it should pop up on a Squamish page

[still_climbin]

G-Spot, did you notice that the photo on your link is of one of us old guys climbing the first moves on Angel Crack?

 

That is one of several photos that hung on the wall of Shelton's Cafe (Hotel Tyrol)in Leavenworth in the late sixties. Don't recall/never knew who took them; interesting it should pop up on a Squamish page

Ah, yes! The Shelton. It was the last business on the street to go gingerbread. Thats why the climbers all supported it. That back section with the photos on the wall was the best place in the state to get beta on climbs. Good place for cheap food and beer too.