cocaine connection icicle buttress bolts

[mattp]

This isn't one of those climbs. The bolts are in the right places and there are enough of them. The climbs you are describing, on the other hand, are not classics with bolts in good places. Do you see the difference?

 

I disagree on both counts, Dru. Outer Space is a classic climb. So too The Kone in Darrington. Steven Pass Motel anyone? If you look critically at bolted climbs just about everywhere you can find examples of bolts that were "misplaced" for one reason or another or which later turn out to be somewhat obsolete. That was one of the points that Chouinard commented on in his 1961 article that kicked off the modern anti-bolt philosophy

 

Further, I believe that one of the bolts on Cocaine Connection might better be located elsewhere, although I don't know whether I'd actually suggest moving it without going up there and thinking about it, as well as examining the placement with a consideration of whether it could be removed cleanly and thinking about the "useful life" left on the bolt already in place and just how much better would a moved location actually be.

 

--

 

We could heatedly debate whether this or that particular bolt should ever move, or what makes a climb "classic" so that it must be maintained as a museum, but my point is simply that I don't think "classic status" as defined by age should necessarily determine that a route should never be altered.

[Jens]

I was taught that if it your route, you have the rights to tinker with it as you see fit as long as you aren't chipping, carving holds, or other such monkey business that landowners look down upon.

I've added bolts to some of my routes that I've already redpointed.

 

[G-spotter]

"If it ain't broke don't fix it". Cocaine Connection is far from broke.

[mattp]

I'm not sure you have full rights to do as you see fit, Jens -- or at least that you should. For nearly 50 years we've used the First Ascent rule as a means to limit the proliferation of bolts, while having some balance in favor of "safety" or "sensibility" by allowing the FA to upgrade. This practice has served us well, but it has rested on the assumptions that (1) the FA is likely to be more thoughtful about altering the route than others might be and (2) there is a measure of respect that we owe the FA in allowing them to decide. I think many people who have hammered away about the FA rule, too, have assumed that (3) the FA is not going to want to add bolts to older routes because they will feel that this "degrades" their image or something.

 

The FA rule has served us well, but it is not 100% perfect.

[roboboy]

I have to give credit to the first ascensionist for taking the trouble to solicit opinions before taking any action. That's way beyond what many would do, especially in an active and passionate forum such as this one. A thick hide is oftentimes more essential here than on runout slab

 

I think Mark W should also feel good that he did a route and most (or even all) people think that it was decently done. Probably anyone could go up there after the fact and think of a bit better way to place bolts. I don't think there is any intent to criticize him in any way.

[mattp]

If you are responding to my line of discussion, Robo, I wholeheartedly agree: I have long enjoyed Cocaine Connection and I in no way mean to sound critical of it or of Mr. W or of the climbers who developed any other route I mentioned or might mention if we were to continue this discussion. I'm interested in discussing the nuances of how people view these questions.

[ScottP]

"If it ain't broke don't fix it". Cocaine Connection is far from broke.

 

I agree.

 

25 years of use without a reputation as a dangerous route-in fact, with a reputation as a good entry level lead-makes the route established and accepted as is. Just because Mr. Webster has second thoughts about the job he did doesn't mean he should act on those thoughts. Perhaps he should go back and do it a few more times to be sure. I have led routes that on some days are a cruise and some days seem hard. It was not the route, but my head and/or physical state that made the experience what it was.

 

After that much time and countless ascents, often with individuals doing so multiple times, and without complaint, the route is part of the Icicle Experience and should remain as it is.

 

[Drederek]

This isn't one of those climbs. The bolts are in the right places and there are enough of them. The climbs you are describing, on the other hand, are not classics with bolts in good places. Do you see the difference?

I disagree. The bolts are not along the natural line of the climb. Its much easier to stay on a more direct course to the left of the bolts. This is one of my wife's favorite climbs and we do it once a year or so. I don't come within ten feet of the first bolt, placing a small cam at the overlap above the start instead (also out of the line but providing much more protection from going over the roof). Then I wander up and over to the next couple of bolts before passing the rest of em up. I've always assumed there were more edges along the line of bolts that have since been worn away - making those 2-3 clips are most likely the scariest part of that pitch. If the FA wants to alter the route he may want to reassess the whole job and not just slap a fix on it.

[plexus]

The FA owner does have the right to add protection if he wants. I too laud him for bringing this up for discussion. I say go up there with one of your closest climbing partners, have them lead it and ask their opinion.

 

I think though that if you did add a bolt or two, you might regret it later on because it could spoil your previous accomplishment. Think about it, try it again, wait till the end of the summer before making a decision.

[G-spotter]

can doesn't mean should

[catbirdseat]

Talk about a throwaway phrase. It belongs right up there with "That's just your opinion".

[G-spotter]

It's a simple and fundamental truth, just like f=ma

[markwebster]

wow, thanks for all the suggestions guys! So much of what you've all said is true. Even the part about bachar adding more and more bolts to his routes as he ages...ouch, too close to the truth.

 

Just 2 years ago I led it and did fine. That time, I thought the move off the second bolt was the scary one, but there is a one half inch cam that might hold a fall there, to protect a slide off the vertical bulge.

The move above the third bolt risks about a 50 foot pendulum fall, but it is more of a swinger on smooth slab, than an ankle breaker ledge fall. I was just too scared to risk it.

 

Another good point brought up was that the route does not have a dangerous reputation, and it's quite well known. The hardies do it all the time as the first pitch to r&d.

 

We didn't intend for it to become that, and no, we weren't high when we put it up. I used to do Cocaine crack back then, and never bothered with r&d until a couple years ago.

 

I think the bottom line is that most of you are right. I simply need to spend more time warming up on friction before I go up there, and then I can climb it fine. I tend to skip that part of my skill set these days as Exit 38 is all face, and so close.

 

Before 38 existed, I always served a long friction apprenticeship each spring in the pinnacles. When I got good enough for washboards, it was summer and I had my full skillset, ready for anything.

 

I have no desire to see my route become another battle zone of the dreaded boltchoppers.

 

I still say it's run-out, but I think too many people enjoy the run-out for me to go up there and change it so beginners are more comfortable. It's easy to backoff, as I did, and wait for another day.

 

See you out there!

[bwrts]

I climbed this route on Saturday April 12- as before, fun rambley line.

 

Some tidbits which may help a first timer or not:

 

1) start below the initial small roof crack (near first bolt) on off the low-angle slab instead of the typical belay ledge off the trail adjacent to the roof crack. Makes for a few more moves prior to the crux slabby step over crack to bolts.

 

2) I typically avoid first two bolt and climb straight up and right towards third bolt. Does NOT detract much from climb other than avoiding the somewhat scary step over to first bolt. Gear is bomber to boot.

 

3)bolts are NOT always near easiest climbing on the slab.

 

4) able to stretch rope with a bit of simuclimb to reach 2nd belay spot above two bolt stance in the dish.

HOWEVER the second pitch is Really run out but Easy. Don't combine if you are not comfortable leading runout 5.8.

The climbing is not 5.8 but if your belayer is simuclimbing it may feel harder than it really is- at about 5.6.

 

Yellow wall and the Ramp climbs above second pitch are stellar somewhat dusty lines that never really see traffic but should in my opinion. The end of either YW or R pitch deposits you up and right of RandD last pitch. One could traverse over to RandD or pick one of the few unnamed variations to the top.

OR STEP up and climb Big Bertha which I am unsure on amount of repeats.

More than Jim Yoder???

anyone know the answer?

[Raindawg]

How long until Raindawg chimes in???

 

Not long.

 

You put up the route so you should be allowed to make the call.

 

The so-called FA "rule" is nonsense. If it's on public land, no individual has jurisdiction over any of it. If some jerk bolts a crack or does some other disgraceful act some folks might show up with a crowbar. You want to add a bolt? Consider the comments below.

 

You "wild and wacky don't tell me what t'do climbers" want a rule? How about this: you can remove a bolt from a route (or replace an old crappy one in the same hole) but you can't add any. If someone's not up to leading the runout...find another route or come back when you're up for it. Less crap added to the rock the better.

 

Get used to climbing with fewer bolts, because that is the future. Someday you're going to look back at the current sport/grid bolt/rap bolt phenomenon as crude, selfish, unenvironmental and unenlightened.

[RuMR]

*yawn* here we go here we go here we go...

[denalidave]

IMHO, Yes the FA has the final say so on a route. BUT, if we consider a route a work of art you could look at it a bit differently. How many artist go back and touch up a painting or sculpture after it has been considered completed and put on display for public use? Sure they could but it is probably considered bad form to do so. Let's add a bit more mustache to Mona Lisa...think of the outrage that would have caused. Routes should be left alone unless the climbing community at large agrees it is excessively unsafe, good luck getting an agreed consensus on that. Just my .02 worth, but I guess I'm a day late and about .98 short...

[Raindawg]

Routes should be left alone unless the climbing community at large agrees it is excessively unsafe, good luck getting an agreed consensus on that. Just my .02 worth, but I guess I'm a day late and about .98 short...

 

Who is the "climbing community at large"? Does that include the masses of minions who frolic in the gym but rarely venture outdoors? Does it include any of the untold thousands of "climbers" who bought some shoes, ropes and quickdraws to grab some quick "adventure" at grid-bolted venues like Exit 38 and its ilk?

 

I say: add another bolt = wreck it some more.

[minx]

this is a fun climb, if a bit run out. h/e there's definitely additionaly pro that can place if you're a chicken like i am. i think some people jump on this w/o considering taking any pro w/them except draws in which case it might be a little heady for a 5.7 leader. I seem to remember the bolts being in a good place though. IMO, it doesn't need anything else but I don't think adding a bolt or two would ruin the climb.

[ZONK]

its fine the way it is.

[el jefe]

this thread is reminiscent of those medieval discussions regarding the number of angels that would fit on the head of a pin...

[Tony_Bentley]

I can see some merit of having another bolt for that route. There are plenty of climbs for the masses though. Your call.

 

My 2 cents.

 

On another note, I was up there Sunday and was on a route that had some slings slung around a tree with rap rings. I decided to clip one ring and call off belay and the second was the one bomber ring I was planning on rapping from. I yell off belay and pull rope and thread and toss and begin to unclip the locker from the other ring I'm clipped to and noticed the ring was attached to a sling that was chewed through and just sitting there, not actually tied to anything. In retrospect it got me thingking; how about the top anchors? Maybe instead of adding bolts to a route that may or may not need them, how about using your bolts to replace all of the tat at the top of most routes up there?

[NateF]

...the ring was attached to a sling that was chewed through and just sitting there... Maybe instead of adding bolts to a route that may or may not need them, how about using your bolts to replace all of the tat at the top of most routes up there?

Not sure what old slings have to do with bolts. Are you proposing putting in a bolted anchor next to a perfectly good tree, just so no one has to inspect or replace slings?

Were there any good slings? Why didn't you clip into all the slings and then thread through both rings to rap?

 

The bolting question reminds me of a funny story. A buddy of mine was leading the CC slab while I belayed from below the slab. I remember he finished the lead really quickly for how much he absolutely hated slab climbing. Once I pulled myself onto the slab, I was greeted by the perplexing site of the rope running alongside a line of bolts with nothing connecting them. He had walked up to the left of the route, slung a useless shrub and maybe put a few pieces in (can't remember) before reaching the anchors. I had to laugh. Of course, if he had slid off the slab it would not have amused me, but the climbing up the left side was really pretty easy.

[Crillz]

I can see some merit of having another bolt for that route. There are plenty of climbs for the masses though. Your call.

 

My 2 cents.

 

On another note, I was up there Sunday and was on a route that had some slings slung around a tree with rap rings. I decided to clip one ring and call off belay and the second was the one bomber ring I was planning on rapping from. I yell off belay and pull rope and thread and toss and begin to unclip the locker from the other ring I'm clipped to and noticed the ring was attached to a sling that was chewed through and just sitting there, not actually tied to anything. In retrospect it got me thingking; how about the top anchors? Maybe instead of adding bolts to a route that may or may not need them, how about using your bolts to replace all of the tat at the top of most routes up there?

 

Or you could just spend a whopping few of your own dollars, cut the old tat (and take it with you), and replace it with new (maybe even adding a rap ring if one is needed).

[marc_leclerc]

I say it depends on if it is just scary or really dangerous and if there have been many injuries on the route. If the fall is fairly clean but just is a bit of a mental subconcious thing than leave the runout. If it is really dangerous and people are getting injured/killed then you make the call. There was one climb in Harrison that used to only have two bolts but a guy broke his ankles and suffered several other injusries after ledging out on a massive ledge way before the rope caught, the First Ascentionist said that it was fine to retro bolt it so now there are 4 bolts and it is a fun and adequately protected climb