Jump to content

does a nw 5.10 equal 5.8 in the valley?


markwebster

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

*bullshit* alex...

 

long time east coaster here...The new ain't any stiffer than index...you just aren't used to steep....everything there's a big hold, even on the relatively hard stuff...

 

Seneca is bold but not particularly stiffer than index or yos...same with the gunks...

 

it really boils down to how well rounded one is...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um

...the cragging climbs out East are generally stiffer than anything in Washington, much more on par with Index

 

*bullshit* alex...

 

long time east coaster here...The new ain't any stiffer than index...

 

 

uh i think we both agree. what part of "on par" didnt you get, rudy? cry.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...... Anyplace where there is a longer history of trad climbing, before "sport climbing" hit in the late 80s.

 

Certainly. Generally, the older the climb, the more honest the grade. Climbs done in Leavenworth before sport climbing arrived compare well with the grades in Yosemite and Joshua Tree. If you're climbing 5.9 or 5.10 at Castle and Midnight, you'll be able to climb similar grades in the Valley. The biggest difference is that with sticky rubber, careful footwork will make Leavenworth climbs much easier. In the the valley, it's so slick from glaciation and generations of climbing traffic, it seems much less secure. If you climb in the Valley in August or early September, the heat doubles the difficult of some climbs.

 

For the record, Index is soft compared to traditional California climbing. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Index is not "soft" compared to Cali trad grades, its pretty close. I would say some shit is harder some is softer. By saying California you are saying the rest of the West Coast excluding Oregon. Thats a pretty broad brush. There is no doubt that the climbing history is much longer therefore old school ratings are everywhere down there, not so much up here, especially alpine ratings. but who really fucking cares anyway the_finger.gifyellowsleep.gif

For the record Washington Grades are soft and Index is close. boxing_smiley.gifwink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Index is not "soft" compared to Cali trad grades, its pretty close. I would say some shit is harder some is softer. By saying California you are saying the rest of the West Coast excluding Oregon. Thats a pretty broad brush. There is no doubt that the climbing history is much longer therefore old school ratings are everywhere down there, not so much up here, especially alpine ratings. but who really fucking cares anyway the_finger.gifyellowsleep.gif

For the record Washington Grades are soft and Index is close. boxing_smiley.gifwink.gif

 

You suck for not wanting to climb with local folks who want to send, BTW. the_finger.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the note about how "climbs were rated soft when 5.11 was the top end" was very astute. Someone also commented on the fact that a route that started out easy can get hard from the polishing action of foot traffic. We found that very true in the valley. I followed my son up After Six on Manure Pile buttress, and the first pitch was quite slick for a 5.6. Plus the heat added it’s own troubles.

 

Back before we had kids (I’m 52) the wife and I climbed all over Castle Rock and Index and were very comfortable on hard nines there with an occasional 10a like brass balls on Castle. When we took our yearly Valley trip, the ratings seemed reasonable.

 

But now I’ve fallen into the bolt climbers trap, the valley climbs have become polished, and, I gotta admit, age is a factor.

 

South Face of Jello Tower is a very hard 5.7. Classic Crack in Icicle Creek is a hard 8, if you haven’t been jamming much, but an easy 8 if you have. I’ve been in both situations over the years. Back in the eighties I watched a famous local climber free solo it with his daughter on his back.

 

Lions Jaw at Smith is a hard seven for me now, but back in the day the wife and I used to warm up on it.

 

This is my son on the summit of half dome after hiking the tourist trail. Yeah, I got rusty after having kids but I never stopped climbing, and with the whole family climbing now, I can usually find a partner…I might just get my crack skills back. See you out there!

clint_half_dome06.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cobra, about little wing:

 

it's the old "if every single move is the same, do you rate the climb the same grade as those moves, or do you bump the climb's grade up a bit" argument.

 

i agree that it's 5-8. as in, there's no 5-9 move on it, but a leader who has never led 5-9, but has led a handful of 5-8, could easily hang all over the upper half.

 

as for smith tuff, can we agree that lion's jaw is a good example of stiff 5-8? i took two beginners up that, and they barely got it, while they walked up 5-9 and 10a face climbs at smith.

 

also - and i wanna hear it - who has done cling on, on smith's backside? P1 is greasy and hard for 5-8, but P2 is about as hard a 5-9 as i've ever even followed. i bet it gets climbed once a month, tops.

 

I did the lower pithc of Cling-on earlier this year. Talk about a pain in the ass strenuous layback on greasy bald footing! Once you get through the thin section about 1/3 of the way up an onto the jugs its easy though. Seemed awfully strenuous at 5.8 to me too. Of course then I got to watch a friend, stem the whole line on top rope cantfocus.gif And how can you not love the flop onto the bird shit covered ledge crazy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With regard a climb like the South Face of Jello Tower, I think that my own view of the difficulty has been greatly impacted by changes in my style of climbing.

 

When I was a pup, I didn't mind throwing in a piece and gunning it to the next rest stance which might be as much as fifteen feet up (or more in some cases), and I didn't mind taking what by today's standard are considered big falls. I never got badly hurt doing this, but I no longer like taking such risks. That willingness to throw myself at something got me up lots of climbs, though, and I was able to lead the South Face of Jello Tower and think nothing of it at a time when 5.9 was really my limit. Hell, the pro was right there and somehow I always seemed to make it to the jug.

 

Today, I think there are much fewer climbers young or old who are willing to plug and go if it means even the possiblity of a moderate fall, and by this I mean something more than a sport fall where the bolt is at your knees or above, Consequently, we don't learn to simply sprint through something where "the sequence" is not clear before nearly every move.

 

This is part of why a very technical 5.10 face sequence requiring back stepping and very specific weight transfers is often seen as much "easier" than a 5.9 chimney whereas they would have been viewed quite differently "back in the day." It doesn't explain all the trend toward uprating many of the old classics, but it explains some of it.

 

I'm not saying the South Face is in any way run out or that the pro is not right there in front of you - it is - but I do think that climbers who might not have the technical skills needed to climb it carefully, move by move, can probably gun it and grab the jug if they can simply free their mind enough to do so. (I wonder, too, if a hold may have broken off some time in the last 30 years.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May also explain why people don't aid much here. big, scary, flip over backwards falls are always in the back of the mind...

 

funny enough, I find myself more willing to take bigger risks now than when I started climbing. Maybe it's just because I figure I have less time left so I'm putting less on the line. Maybe I am just more comfortable climbing. Or maybe climbing does make me dummmer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May also explain why people don't aid much here. big, scary, flip over backwards falls are always in the back of the mind...

 

funny enough, I find myself more willing to take bigger risks now than when I started climbing. Maybe it's just because I figure I have less time left so I'm putting less on the line. Maybe I am just more comfortable climbing. Or maybe climbing does make me dummmer.

 

Isn't it once your climbing standard increases, you can also increase your fear tolerance. Where you once would stop to place gear with your last piece at waist level-which was a crappy place to stop to place-you can now breeze on by without a second thought to an appropriate rest to place a piece.

 

BTW, a simple finger jam and foot stem make SF Jello Tower a 5.8. thumbs_up.gif Don't you think a large part of the mystique of SF was the guidebook's reference to bad consequences of a groundfall on the route? Well duh! Isn't that the case for most groundfalls? rolleyes.gif

Edited by telemarker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...