French Technique

[catbirdseat]

I was given an old copy of Yvon Chouinard's book Climbing Ice, published in 1978, I believe. It is really fun to read. He spends a very significant number of pages on French Technique and has many pictures of French masters demonstrating moves.

 

Since those days, there have been improvements in both boot design and crampon design, not to mention tool design which make front pointing more comfortable and efficient. French technique gets short shrift in modern texts, even though it can be quite efficient. The downside of it is that it takes a LOT of practice to get good at it.

 

So I'm wondering is French Technique really obsolete or is it just that the transition from French to Frontpoint simply occurs at a lower angle? Most climbers know how to do a "pied canard", or a "pied troisieme", which is a hybrid technique. But how many can climb 60 degree ice using "pied a plat, piolet ramasse"? Chouinard didn't show any pictures of himself demonstrating this stuff, I think because he was busy pioneering "German" technique.

 

The other question I have is are there people out there who are really good at this stuff and like to teach it? Which parts of French Technique still apply today?

[nordicpunk]

Don't you mean "Freedom Technique"

[sitandbefit]

Nordicpunk and I have vast experience using "freedom technique" up easy ice and then to "freedom free" routes in the poorest of style.

 

Matt

[Ade]

To get back to the topic in hand...

 

I don't think French technique is that outdated. If you're doing a big alpine route the more you can save your calves for the stepper stuff the better. It's not that easy, probably harder in a lot of more modern boots that limit ankle flexibility (plastics for example).

 

Still well worth practicing if you ask me.

 

Ade

[catbirdseat]

It seems like some of the newer ice boots available are more flexible in the ankles. The Scarpa Alpha for example, is probably the best of the double plastics. Some of the new leather boots have got to be pretty good.

[John Frieh]

Outdated. The french technique does not allow for heel spurs.

[Ade]

That's true a lot of the newer ice/mixed boots are much more flexible in the ankle and cut lower making French Technique easier. Conversely the offer less ankle support for pure frontpointing, trading it for more flexibility which is useful on technical ice.

[Jim]

That text is an absolute classic. I was lucky enough to get an autographed copy when it first came out. W/O sounding like an old fart, the more techniques you can use the better off you'll be. I've seen some bash and plunder types get totally stymied when they have to get up small bulges with only one ax and no rope. Technique man, technique!

[catbirdseat]

French Technique presupposes a single ice axe. Once you have two tools in your hands it actually become harder to do.

[G-spotter]

you could always holster one

[zaugg]

tool

[ketch]

I agree with Ade on this. Using French Technique is helpfull in saving the calves. I currently climb in Scarpa Freny XT's which are plenty flexible but I still like saving the calves for last.

 

CBS, as to your question I usually do transition to front points quicker. I do also keep the French in reserve. On a longer piece that I need to keep moving on, switching technique around keeps differant muscle sets in use.

 

Frieh you could heel hook if you want but dont try Pied Assis (the rest position where you sit on your heels facing down hill) the spurs get a little caught up.

[zaugg]

french technique = téléphérique

[catbirdseat]

french technique = téléphérique

At least how the modern French do it. And descent by parapente.

[John Frieh]

Frieh you could heel hook if you want but dont try Pied Assis (the rest position where you sit on your heels facing down hill) the spurs get a little caught up.

 

Actually I just plant the heel spurs in the ice and hang upside down.

 

French Technique = Fundamentals. No offense CBS but I'm surprised the mounties don't detail it in depth...

[sobo]

I still use it, just like Ade and ketch point out. It's a great way to save your calves or just work a different set of muscles while letting others recover. Great stuff.

 

Still have my original copy of the book, too.

[Don_Serl]

I don't think full-on "French Technique", as laid out in Climbing Ice, has survived at all as a viable part of the modern climbing repertoire beyond roughly 45º neve slopes. But that's exactly where is was intended to be used. Even the master, Chouinard, says in CI of FT:

"The natural terrain for this technique is the hard frozen snow (neve) or soft ice of the Western Alps, where crampon points will penetrate easily..."

 

The reason for the limitation is easy to see when you examine the photos in CI and think about what's going on: FT was a way of coping with steep ice in a time when tools were barely adequate for the job, so technique had to suffice. FT, despite its physical challenges and relative insecurity, was faster than cutting steps, is the real bottom line.

 

Over the past 3 decades, immense improvements have come along in crampons (which were not all that bad back then) and tools (which were totally inadequate for steep ice - say beyond 60º). Technique has been supplanted by technology.

 

Of the original FT, essentially only "flat-footing" remains. And that is an essential alpine skill. As others have pointed out, unless you can flat-foot with confidence on quite steep terrain, you're forced to front-point, and your calves pay. But over 50º, even with perfect neve (the easiest frozen medium to climb), there's hardly a person alive who would NOT front-point (or "hobble", with one foot flat and the other front-pointing) these days - it's faster yet, and (given 2 modern tools, or even solid technique with one) immensely more secure than balancing around 'a plat'.

 

'Old' techniques can often teach us things, and practising FT offers a wealth of insight into balance, security of crampon points, how to grip an ice-axe most effectively, and so on, but it's these underlying skills rather than the technique itself that are useful today.

 

Besides, it's been obvious since the 1st ascent of the Eiger in 1938 that front-pointing was THE way to climb steep ice. Remember Harrer's beautifully incisive quote:

"...I looked back, down our endless ladder of steps. Up it I saw the New Era coming at express speed; there were two men running - and I mean running, not climbing - up it."

It was Heckmair and Vorg, wearing 12 point crampons. The days of what Harrer himself in the neighbouring paragraph calls "the technique of the past" were over 70 years ago.

 

cheers, don

 

p.s. to be clear, i flat-foot more than most, and love its speed, ease, and freedom. in its place and time...

Edited April 21, 2006 by Don_Serl

[catbirdseat]

Bravo, Don. That was exactly the sort of post I was hoping you'd make.

[sobo]

As I was, too, Don. I saw you in the Who's Online making the reply, and kept waiting for your sage words to appear. Alas, I had to go home...

[Don_Serl]

btw, tks for stimulating this discussion CBS. what a pleasure it has been to pull out and re-read Climbing Ice. i had forgotten the intensity of information in this book - the equipment and some of the technique is dated, but the underlying wisdom is still absolutely relevant. i find myself nodding in agreement with nearly every paragraph, and continually stimulated by the fineness of definition and detail that's a hallmark of this text. Chouinard was plainly a great master, and despite his protestations of difficulty with writing, the end result is magnificent.

 

cheers, don

[Lowell_Skoog]

I believe (and I can't remember where I heard it) that Chouinard had considerable help from Doug Robinson in the writing of "Climbing Ice." Robinson's help was not acknowledged in the book. Anybody else heard this?

[cj001f]

I believe (and I can't remember where I heard it) that Chouinard had considerable help from Doug Robinson in the writing of "Climbing Ice." Robinson's help was not acknowledged in the book. Anybody else heard this?

 

I think Robinson mentioned that somewhere in "A Night On the Ground, A Day in the Open". Robinson was on the V-Notch ascent, so was certainly there at the beginning. How much influence he had, who knows. If I remember he made a few other claims in the book, or maybe in some Mountain Gazette issue, that struck me as sour grapes rightly or wrongly.

[Don_Serl]

I believe (and I can't remember where I heard it) that Chouinard had considerable help from Doug Robinson in the writing of "Climbing Ice." Robinson's help was not acknowledged in the book. Anybody else heard this?

 

in the introduction, Chouinard is clear about Robinson's contribution:

"...Doug Robinson... helped a lot with the writing."

 

good job, whoever wielded the pen.

 

cheers, don

[curtveld]

Robinson may have helped, but the text has the signature Coonyard directness throughout. What Chouinard says in a sentence, Robinson could reflect on for a paragraph, if not a page. Maybe that's why it doesn't read as dated.

 

And most of the technques are still relevant, if not cutting edge.

Edited April 22, 2006 by curtveld

[Dechristo]

And most of the technques are still relevant, if not cutting edge.

 

punny guy