People putting up new routes

[Clarence]

Way to get after it!

 

Seems like there have been quite a few in the last couple weeks. It's an inspiration to the rest of us.

[wayne]

If it hadnt been such bad wx on the last half dozen weekends there would have been more. I again went 1 for 3 on my attempts and got the lesser project finished. The smart ones headed East.

There is no greater fear and then hopefully satisfaction a climber can get than with the truly unknown.

I am working on a page that I hope will some justice to the efforts of this amazing generation of new routes. I have felt for many years that this is perhaps the most exciting local new route scene in the lower states. The TRs keep everyone going. I for one know how hard it is to do NRs and TRs, so my sincere thanks , and keep them coming!

Safely, that is

[Sol]

hells yeah.

 

props to everyone.

 

word is some squamish hardmen are heading south to free the tempest...

[klenke]

I like these new route reports too. But it seems odd to me that they always seem to be 5.10 this or 5.10 that. It's as if those that put up the route don't feel like they're going to get the respect of their peers if it's just a 5.8 or 5.9. So they may make the crux pitch harder than the easiest line on it just to bump up their final rating. But there might well be insufficient detail in their topo for the next persons who go up there. The second ascensionists might get to the crux pitch and do the easier line and ask why the higher rating.

 

Anyway, it's just an observation.

[pms]

probably a difficult thing to observe from where you sit

[olyclimber]

i doubt it has to do with obtaining a rating, but rather obtaining the best line

[tanstaafl]

that's because there's no point in reporting those routes that goes at 5.6 moss, 5.4 trees, and 5.scary shitty licheny rock. which you bailed from in the end anyway.

[olyclimber]

some people are there for the summit, some people are there for the climb

[mattp]

I think tanstaffl has a point with regard the likelihood that easier lines tend to follow crack systems and broken terrain where vegetation can more easily take hold and I have gone out looking for easy new routes of, say, a 5.8 grade and had difficulty finding something that I thought was worthy. I also think there is a tendency for those pursuing new routes to want to seek lines closer to their own limits than climbs that are much easier. Most of those developing crag climbs and exploring alpine rock climb at least 5.10 and a 5.10 climber is generally going to be more excited about a new 5.10 line than a 5.6 one.

[klenke]

If we have before us an unclimbed ridge, how many routes are there on it? If one and only one climb takes place on it and the first ascencionists, by virtue of their skill or by necessity, take the route they do, then they can rate their line based on its difficulty for them. But does their line define the ridge as a whole? How many ascents does a ridge require in order to nail down the average or most appropriate rating of it?

 

Or more to the point:

It is okay to claim the first ascent of a feature (like a ridge) but the rating generated from the climb should not be taken as the definite rating subsequent climbers would experience. This says nothing of conditions on a route that make things easier or harder like weather or snow.

 

So a report goes up that's rated 5.10. Will this deter others whose abilities top out at 5.7 or 5.8 from going up there? Maybe. Not a big deal to me because I can't even climb 5.2. Heck, I can't even do that. But I could bushwhack you into oblivion.

[AlpineMonkey]

I don't think anybody is "making" a line harder by not going the easiest way. Like for that ridge John and I just did, we were staying true to the feature, but also going the easiest way we could find. I think there is just a lot of 5.10 out there. In terms of reported rattings, its always what the climbers encounter and should not be taken as the definite ratting for the climb. For example on Bear there was a hard chimney pitch by the FAers and the second ascentist took a peak around a corner and found a nice 5.8 pitch.

[mattp]

Can you cite examples of routes where you think the FA's deliberately took a harder line up a feature that would otherwise have been climbed at a lower grade? On larger mountain routes I bet this is relatively rare. Sure, in the case of Mr. Monkey's recent climb they may have climbed 5.10 where they could have traversed off the ridge and found a 4th class gully, but is this a contrivance or were they simply climbing the ridge as they found it and their abilities allowed?

[AlpineMonkey]

Can you cite examples of routes where you think the FA's deliberately took a harder line up a feature that would otherwise have been climbed at a lower grade? On larger mountain routes I bet this is relatively rare.

 

Blake and Sol said they took a 5.10B start at the base of Distal Phalanx, when John and I never found climbing harder then 5.6.

[billcoe]

I like these new route reports too. But it seems odd to me that they always seem to be 5.10 this or 5.10 that. It's as if those that put up the route don't feel like they're going to get the respect of their peers if it's just a 5.8 or 5.9. So they may make the crux pitch harder than the easiest line on it just to bump up their final rating. But there might well be insufficient detail in their topo for the next persons who go up there. The second ascensionists might get to the crux pitch and do the easier line and ask why the higher rating.

 

Anyway, it's just an observation.

 

Did someone say 5.8? Link

 

I got no respect anyway so that's not an issue. I called that one 5.7 and the next 3 people said 5.8, but there ya go. I don't find what you say about the 5.10 and up thing odd at all Klenke. I think this 5.10 and harder effect may only be cause the easier lines mostly already got poached in the 50s and 60's. Looking at say, either of Bryan's lines in the Sawtooths (Idaho forum), it's looks like some damn scary unprotected difficult squeeze sized chimney in that 1700' route, something most sane people avoid and do not even try to climb to to check out unless it's layed back or has rests or pro. That line probably had many people look at it throughout the 50's, 60's, 70's, 80's and 90's and say, "let's go play and live for another day". Then some sick strong kid shows up who's been getting some solid mileage and finally just runs up it.

 

As far as your easier rating point goes. Last month or so I had the joy to do a couple of routes with Bryan and he graded both at least 2 full grades lower than I thought they were. (This may be the effect of old age on me too) So if anyone is planning on repeated his 5.10 route, do not think for a moment that you will be doing a 5.8 that is just called a 5.10 to gain any respect on a web site, as that dude don't play like that. He called the 5.11 line we did a 10c, so if anything, I feel the reverse is most likely true. I bumped it up not just cause I found it difficult, and it may be harder than 5.11, but I know a relatively solid 5.10 climber had tried the line and finally just gave up and walked away, unable to even dog up it. I think both John and Bryan have not only given great info for anyone who wants to 2nd, but they'll gladly give more if you want it - just ask then or their partners.

 

I love seeing the great pictures along with the reports too. Johns buttress shot he borrowed and posted was classic.

 

Anyway, that's my thoughts, not that anyone gives a rats ass, but it beats talking about vice presidential candidates:-)

 

[klenke]

Matt, I'm speaking in hypotheticals. But one I can think of was the E. Ridge Direct on Forbidden. 5.8 is the crux? It didn't seem that hard to me. Did I miss the real 5.8 line/moves that made it 5.8 in the first place?

 

My point is valid. Man is a small creature next to a mountain. There's always another way.

 

Heck, even if I do the exact same crux line, if I do it a different/better way (maybe because I'm taller or lankier than the first ascensionists or because I'm a better stemmer), I may find the crux to be easier. If the average person who follows me also finds it easier, is the route still at the original higher rating or does the consensus become that it's easier than that?

 

These are all questions to ponder for which the answer is purely notional until real-life examples can be tested.

[pms]

[John Frieh]

Klenke: your points are valid. Ridges are great example where one can stray from the crest to make it easier. Same could be said about face routes...

 

WRT DT though it doesnt appear so in the photo taking the easiest line up the ridge without straying to far from the ridge crest will still require 5.10 climbing... one of the last bumps in the ridge overhangs on all sides but one. On another one of the bumps I could have bumped the grade to hard 10 but the right side of the crest offered easier (though looser) climbing. Craig and I had one goal: on top before dark. The fact that we didnt free it all should reiterate that.

 

I will add I always try to sand bag anything I put up. I would hate for the NW to get the reputation of "fluffy ratings" Related to that though I havent seen too many "fluffy rating" FAs I do believe I've seen some FAs bumped up to a grade IV such that they can sneak into the AAJ.

 

I think the underlying message here is grades are a best guess and highly suspect in any venue: aid, alpine, ice, rock, etc. I guess that's why I describe myself as a consistent 5.8 leader. Any thing harder than that? No guarantees

 

[EWolfe]

You are welcome!

[DirtyHarry]

I agree somewhat with some of the stuff Mr. Bushwhacker says. Some lines, like this Tempest Route, climb crack systems where there is not much opportunity for variation and the line is pretty straight forward. Other climbs are more on features where some of the harder pitches may be somewhat contrived - or not.

 

When we climbed the NE Ridge of Mt Alberta, for example (not a FA)one could have probably gone around some of the harder pitches and into a chossy 4th class gully. On Castle Peak, we could have gone into the waterfall salad filled gash and circumvented the crux pitch. Aesthetics dictated a more direct line though.

[Peter_Puget]

Or how about...."guessimated" free ratings given for routes when they were aided/ and or examined on TR? Here I am not talking about the recent spate of routes but on some other as yet still unreported lines from years ago. Topos with quite specific ratings have been drawn up and turn out to be complete fiction.

 

[John Frieh]

The stuff that turns me off is the "marketing" of an FA to all the new medias...

 

Sure if they contact you awesome and congrats but I get the lurking suspicion that isnt always the case...

[Peter_Puget]

Self marketing isn't always bad...what's bad is believing your own hype. The internet has changed the world a bit - sure in some sense it's pure chest beating but on the other hand it's a communal camp fire and a TR is simply sharing the psych. I have vivid memories of engaging a crux and thinking back on how a friend pantomimed the crux sequence while holding a beer in one the night before around a camp fire.

 

That said Climbing, Alpinist and the other mags are unadulterated marketing. Big names, big numbers and big climbs sell. The ongoing manipulation and creation of conflict (both real and imagined), and the continuous re-writing of history can drive a sane man crazy.

 

[mattp]

Hear here.

[John Frieh]

Big names, big numbers and big climbs sell.

 

Absolutely.

 

It's when people make their climb out to be something it isnt... when they actively convince/solicit some editor so that they can be seen amongst the true big names/numbers/climbs... that's what I'm talking about

[Peter_Puget]

I know the editors are active participants. So what? Another fact is the truth will quite likely never come out or a new fiction will simply take its place over time. Another so what?

 

They aren't really part of my life anyway.

 

What is part of my life is Sol's many trip reports inspiring Dick to post all the way from Spain. No editor just another story around the camp fire. I won't be going there. Not enough free time and honestly cragging is what I dream about. But the psych is so infectious that I've been thinking all day about checking out my latest fantasy this weekend.