Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • olyclimber

      WELCOME TO THE CASCADECLIMBERS.COM FORUMS   02/03/18

      We have upgraded to new forum software as of late last year, and it makes everything here so much better!  It is now much easier to do pretty much anything, including write Trip Reports, sell gear, schedule climbing related events, and more. There is a new reputation system that allows for positive contributors to be recognized,  it is possible to tag content with identifiers, drag and drop in images, and it is much easier to embed multimedia content from Youtube, Vimeo, and more.  In all, the site is much more user friendly, bug free, and feature rich!   Whether you're a new user or a grizzled cascadeclimbers.com veteran, we think you'll love the new forums. Enjoy!
Sign in to follow this  
Blake

I'm getting better without trying

Recommended Posts

I looked at a new book called "Weekend Rock" the other day, and noticed, among the non-alpine pictures of AlpineDave and AlpinFox, that several routes I've done have gotten harder since I began climbing a couple years ago. At least 2 or 3 routes at Mt. Erie even got an upgrade from the new guidebook that came out just in the last couple years. Just for an example, Springboard went from 5.8 to 5.9R. Is this because the book is aimed at the very moderate crag climber who wont be climbing 5.10 anyways? It still seems weird to have such obvious grade jumps though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i noticed the same thing in the Weekend Rock Oregon book. A couple of the old-school climbs got upped a grade from how they're listed in the Tim Olson or Alan Watts books.

Granted, the ones I noticed are indeed climbs that were usually considered hard for their grades, but i think that sticking with the old grades is a good way to keep myself honest. they can be a good ego check.

anyway, i hope that you're right and that it's just because the Weekend Rock books are aimed at people who don't climb so much, and that it's not indicative of grade inflation becoming more accepted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if a route is undergraded, isn't it just as stupid to keep it undergraded as it would be to keep a route overgraded? If consensus dictates a grade change, then the grade should change.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, but i don't think these particular routes are undergraded at all. What I'm saying is, it seems to me that the book over-grades them because of the target market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the rating on Springboard should take into consideration the weight of the leader. A fat leader is unwilling to walk out as far on that rotten old snag before making the move onto the rock. Damn, I am starting to sound like Dru.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They should have kept the grades capped at 5.10. That way climbs could only ever be downgraded. I guess too many stoned egomaniacs thought 'Spinal Tap' was for real.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they gained a consensus to change the grade, then I'd just want to hear about it - that'd be easy to mention in a route description. they certainly don't need my opinion, but how much of a consensus was there?

And having a consensus that "this climb is hard for 5.8" is different than having a consensus that "this climb should be re-rated 5.9".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think he should have removed the ratings completely from the book. along with route descriptions, gear needs, etc.

just list the names and locations, and let people experience adventure without preconception that colors the entirety of their experience.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

just list the names and locations, and let people experience adventure without preconception that colors the entirety of their experience.

 

I don't know if that's the goal of the book's target market. Another climb that was upgraded (5.7->5.8) was "False Impressions" at the powerline wall. I've taken a bunch of first-time-ever climbers to Mt. Erie and everyone has been able to TR this route. That wouldn't happen with a 5.8 in Leavenworth or Squamish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe better to over rate than under rate. Don't want Blake to get in over his head......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
maybe better to over rate than under rate. Don't want Blake to get in over his head......

 

Maybe you better change the first pitch rating on your Gunsight route then Jim, because if that's a "5.7" I was definitely in over my head.

4427IMGP2605.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe you went a different way, but my appologies. Usually it takes a few ascents (or more) to to make a good helpful rating.

Edited by pms

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They should have kept the grades capped at 5.10. That way climbs could only ever be downgraded. I guess too many stoned egomaniacs thought 'Spinal Tap' was for real.

 

Hey, I saw Spinal Tap and they were for real, played their own instruments and all.

 

Seriously, I think it should be possible to regrade a climb, but it should probably also be very rare and usually done because the route has actually changed - erosion, vandalism, or the like.

 

It preserves the history of the sport to have "old school" rated routes mixed with more newly created routes and makes people think about what climbing was like 30+ years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×