KaskadskyjKozak Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 hey, anytime you wanna take me out and skewl me on how to climb or protect something, you let me know, mr.ace instructor... you're beyond rehabilitation. consider completing your avator with a properly-placed hole, and it'll become a fully accurate representation of you
KaskadskyjKozak Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 I led non-technical climbs in the Sierra at age 13, bought Mountaineering: the freedom of the hills when I was 14, and by age 17 I was climbing grade IV's and V's in the Tetons and the Bugaboos. I bet if I had taken a Mountaineers course I wouldn't have dared do any of that. Again: I'm not down on getting good instruction. I'm simply saying the argument that it is essential is just plain wrong. And I'm quite happy I never ran into someone who told I wasn't safe to go climbing in the Tetons when none of us had passed any formal test. We had a blast! not everyone can (or should try to) be as great as you
Squid Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 let's keep the personal attacks and spray out of this thread. I can't believe I just said that.
DirtyHarry Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 I led non-technical climbs in the Sierra at age 13, bought Mountaineering: the freedom of the hills when I was 14, and by age 17 I was climbing grade IV's and V's in the Tetons and the Bugaboos. I bet if I had taken a Mountaineers course I wouldn't have dared do any of that. Again: I'm not down on getting good instruction. I'm simply saying the argument that it is essential is just plain wrong. And I'm quite happy I never ran into someone who told I wasn't safe to go climbing in the Tetons when none of us had passed any formal test. We had a blast! not everyone can (or should try to) be as great as you Be a good comrade and don't stand out from the herd, now.
RuMR Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 HEY...NUMBER 345#A is actin' up...would you have a word with him please???
plark42 Posted May 3, 2006 Author Posted May 3, 2006 Hmm... Totally different aspects.. I am mostly interested in climbing glaciated peaks with maybe a few pitches of class 4 or low grade 5 rock at the top. I guess I can read that out of a book huh? As for accumulating experience leading glacier climbs.. that stuff doesn't happen over night nor could you learn it from reading books.. believe me, I have read freedom of the hills cover to cover, but that still doesn't prepare you if someone slips into a crack and you need to ACTUALLY rescue someone. Granted I have practiced a ton, but gaining the experience in routefinding cannot be done in a single course!
DirtyHarry Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 He's an enemy of the state. Send him to the Gulag immediately for reeducation.
KaskadskyjKozak Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 I led non-technical climbs in the Sierra at age 13, bought Mountaineering: the freedom of the hills when I was 14, and by age 17 I was climbing grade IV's and V's in the Tetons and the Bugaboos. I bet if I had taken a Mountaineers course I wouldn't have dared do any of that. Again: I'm not down on getting good instruction. I'm simply saying the argument that it is essential is just plain wrong. And I'm quite happy I never ran into someone who told I wasn't safe to go climbing in the Tetons when none of us had passed any formal test. We had a blast! not everyone can (or should try to) be as great as you Be a good comrade and don't stand out from the herd, now. does everyone have to aspire to grade IV and V climbs to be in this sport? FOTH has a great picture showing "sphere of acceptable risk" - everyone has their own limits and goals. Some of us are perfectly happy and satisfied climbing Grade II and III routes on blue-bird days.
DirtyHarry Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 Well good for them. Then maybe a Mounties course is a good idea for them. Our point is that not everyone needs or would benefit from that type of regimented instruction.
KaskadskyjKozak Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 Hmm... Totally different aspects.. I am mostly interested in climbing glaciated peaks with maybe a few pitches of class 4 or low grade 5 rock at the top. guess you have the same mediocre goals as me. how boring. but gaining the experience in routefinding cannot be done in a single course! for an off-trail approach, or on a glacier? many climbs in this area have boot-paths to the summit during prime season, and there are lots of great route descriptions out there. just curious what you had in mind...
RuMR Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 especially if they want to get past that basic level that i was referring to...
plark42 Posted May 3, 2006 Author Posted May 3, 2006 The mountaineers seem to be the closest thing to just finding a partner and doing it compared to taking courses and such. Is it THAT regimented? What is the preferred method of gaining experience?
plark42 Posted May 3, 2006 Author Posted May 3, 2006 I was talking about route finding on glaciers... if I ever want to go somewhere a bit BIGGER than WA, like Alaska, then I better have a solid basis in the tricks of the trade.
RuMR Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 (edited) quote]The mountaineers seem to be the closest thing to just finding a partner and doing it compared to taking courses and such. Is it THAT regimented? What is the preferred method of gaining experience? if you are looking for rockclimbing as opposed to peakbagging, you are better off not going through the mounties, IMO... Edited May 3, 2006 by RuMR
plark42 Posted May 3, 2006 Author Posted May 3, 2006 also- what happens if the boot path to the summit gets snowed over? what then? just feel my way down and hope for the best?
plark42 Posted May 3, 2006 Author Posted May 3, 2006 I think I am looking for a proven method to gain experience on glaciers.. with a future potential of rock (if I get bored with glacier slogs).
KaskadskyjKozak Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 Well good for them. Then maybe a Mounties course is a good idea for them. Our point is that not everyone needs or would benefit from that type of regimented instruction. who ever said that? you guys jump to conclusions and a few here aren't saying just that not everyone needs "regimented instruction" - they're piling on personal attacks, and blasting the mounties. I don't give a rat's ass if someone doesn't like the Mounties. Everyone has their own opinion. I don't like regimented courses either, or rules, or authority, whatever. Again, you guys jump to conclusions. For climbing, I don't like planning every detail and going up in a large group. I prefer doing stuff on the spur of the moment in a smaller group (3-4). And I don't wear shorts of poly-pro and gaiters and all those other stupid cliches that get posted over and over. get over it, guys
RuMR Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 the mounties would not be a bad approach; however, for rock (if you wanna gain real experience and learn quickly), you are far better served to skip all of their dogma and crap, get somebody to take you out personally and run you through the ringer...
RuMR Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 (edited) Well good for them. Then maybe a Mounties course is a good idea for them. Our point is that not everyone needs or would benefit from that type of regimented instruction. who ever said that? you guys jump to conclusions and a few here aren't saying just that not everyone needs "regimented instruction" - they're piling on personal attacks, and blasting the mounties. I don't give a rat's ass if someone doesn't like the Mounties. Everyone has their own opinion. I don't like regimented courses either, or rules, or authority, whatever. Again, you guys jump to conclusions. For climbing, I don't like planning every detail and going up in a large group. I prefer doing stuff on the spur of the moment in a smaller group (3-4). And I don't wear shorts of poly-pro and gaiters and all those other stupid cliches that get posted over and over. get over it, guys how can you say that after stating that learning on your own would help to find your way into the next edition of accidents???? Edited May 3, 2006 by RuMR
DirtyHarry Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 I led non-technical climbs in the Sierra at age 13, bought Mountaineering: the freedom of the hills when I was 14, and by age 16 or 17 I was climbing grade IV's and V's in the Tetons and the Bugaboos. I bet if I had taken a Mountaineers course I wouldn't have dared do any of that. Again: I'm not down on getting good instruction. I'm simply saying the argument that it is essential is just plain wrong. And I'm quite happy I never ran into someone who told me I wasn't safe to go climbing in the Tetons when none of us had passed any formal test. I'm sure glad you didn't call my parents to warn them of the danger, either. We had a blast! Like Matt, I managed to make my way up a couple Grade IV's in my formitive years (though probably not in as good a style) that both turned into epics on the descent. Perhaps if I had been in the Mountaineers I would have known to "bring a headlamp" or "start the climb before 10:00 a.m." But, in retrospect, I'm glad I went for it and fucked up but learned the many lessons I did on those climbs. Not that this is necessarily relevant, but just thought I'd share.
mattp Posted May 3, 2006 Posted May 3, 2006 KK, I dont see anybody here arguing that you have to climb grade IV or V routes to enjoy climbing. I don't see anybody arguing that your way of approaching learning about the sport is wrong, either. What I see is you saying that somebody else's approach is "WRONG." And you take a cheap shot at me just because - what - I pursued the sport more aggressively at a younger age than you did? You don't see me putting down anybody for being a peak-bagger or a newbie and I don't put you down for being dedicated to promoting the Mountaineers. How 'bout you agree not to put the rest of us down if we don't agree with you?
Recommended Posts