[TR] Beacon Rawk - Bitch Slapped on the Axe of Karma (5.10c A3 III) 11/8/2008

[kevbone]

but the odds are real good it will never be free climbed again without it.

 

 

Pretty arrogant to state it will never go free without this panel. You mean you and I will never free it......I bet some strong MFer could climb it free.

 

The entire cave needs to be RAPPED into and cleaned with a hammer.

 

Of course, this is yet another case where you don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about and the odds are real damn good you could rap hammer and bolt the shit out of it and you'd still never lay a hand on it...

 

Why are you talking about bolts now? I was talking about taking off the widowmakers. I never mentioned bolts.

[JosephH]

The belayer being sheltered is great. So what happens to the unfortunate would-be free climbing leader who pulls it off?

 

Tangen-Foster and I evaluated that for awhile before we headed up the pitch. Essentially the belayer is completely safe and the leader will likely swing free clean of the debris as they fall with it. I've had it happen before out at a route, 'To Air Is Human", that Marco and I put up out at Horsethief on a three-tiered roof at the East end of the main cliff. I pulled on the wrong little stone and the whole wall I was on came down to the tune of about a ton and a half of rock. I swung free and that's what Tangen-Foster and banked on would happen before we did it. I think it's a matter if it isn't a risk you feel you can evaluate and manage then you shouldn't take it - deliberately dumping it for the same reason just seems entirely lame to me.

[ivan]

Mostly joking really. Just trying to help Ivan with his goal of a thousand views.

 

nice - now on to 2000! and a little flamey icon!

[kevbone]

 

The pipeline anchor is the belay.

 

It is A belay. Not THE belay. Funny….I was always taught by beacon locals to run pitches together.

 

Yet another case of not knowing what you talking about - the panel would pose little to no threat to anyone climbing on those other routes if it came down.

 

Joseph. I know where this climb is. I have climbed Pipeline many times. I have stared at the cave for years. I might know exactly where this panel is, but have seen a picture of it earlier in this thread and I have a really good idea where it is. I know the lay of the land as well or better than you. I know that if a rock came down anywhere from the right side upper cave it would potentially land and it or pieces of it would fly in the direction of the climbs I mentioned earlier. To think that it is not dangerous is simply being ignorant. Not being stupid because I know you are not stupid. Just ignorant.

 

And if anyone turned up to climb those lines who had half a brain and was concerned about it they'd go elsewhere for a bit.

 

What if someone was in the middle of aid climbing free for some and they could not just “go elsewhere for a bit”.

 

[max]

what's especially disconcerting to me is all this completely cavalier talk of deliberately dumping a panel with it's history.

 

Three parties of free climbers and a few odd aider (give or take a few passings). This panel is definitely a landmark. Somebody should write up an obit.

[JosephH]

It is A belay. Not THE belay. Funny….I was always taught by beacon locals to run pitches together.

Only an idiot would start that pitch from anywhere but the pipeline belay.

 

I know the lay of the land as well or better than you. I know that if a rock came down anywhere from the right side upper cave it would potentially land and it or pieces of it would fly in the direction of the climbs I mentioned earlier. To think that it is not dangerous is simply being ignorant. Not being stupid because I know you are not stupid. Just ignorant.

Some rock would slough down the slope towards those climbs, the odds of any of it making it down to them airborne is slim.

 

And if anyone turned up to climb those lines who had half a brain and was concerned about it they'd go elsewhere for a bit.

 

What if someone was in the middle of aid climbing free for some and they could not just “go elsewhere for a bit”.

Well, being the elitist misanthrope I am and into crowds when I'm doing something out on the edge, I wouldn't be doing it when anyone else was around, but you're seriously kidding yourself if you think someone at the base of FFS would be in any peril from that panel dumping.

 

[billcoe]

 

Such drama! Can it go to 2,000 posts....? Will attacks with hammers break out......? Will Rebecca stay married or jump on Karma as her first project...?

 

....to be continued in our next soap installment....

 

[markd]

that's funny bill!

 

i guess i'm done posting here as joseph is just ignoring my thoughts. not sure how i got sucked into this anyway.

[kevbone]

not sure how i got sucked into this anyway.

 

Because it is BEACON ROCK.

[JosephH]

joseph,

your last post is, case-and-point what i'm trying to convey. now you're telling ivan what he should be focusing on with his climbing, because YOU think it's right. in all honesty, what do you know about aid climbing anyway? do you ever aid climb?

 

Mark, not at all, read it again. After having watched Ivan solo the corner several times I did tell him I for one would be a lot less scared about him doing it if he weren't frenching when he was roped as he won't be able to french when soloing. And I've got no problem at all with the fact he likes aid climbing - in fact I love that he gets out and aid climbs. This is just a case where aid and free conflict on a line. I've done more then enough aid climbing to know how much control and say you have over how and in what direction you dangle and how much say you have about leaning against the rock at any given point. You're attempting to infer a whole lot I haven't said.

 

if that route means so much to you, why haven't you gone back since the 80s to try it? the rock above there is not "naturally" loose; it was dynamited! you are not working with the natural environment up there.

 

A lot of reasons, I have tried to get on it a couple of times but Marco balked one time and another guy a different time. It's been back on my radar of late for something Shane or you, now that you're here, might be interested in - most people wouldn't be up for it and I get that

 

one more thought: you're SURE this specific rock shouldn't be trundled, so it isn't, yet, you're sure other rocks should be trundled, so you trundle. do you see the pattern?

The differnce is I've only trundled significant rocks that have been absolute death hazard or that are so loose there is no possibility of climbing through / over it safely. I've never in my life deliberately trundled a rock of any significance that was an essential component of a climb.

 

=======================================

 

P.S. Mark, I'm not ignoring your posts at all, but I can only work and answer this many posts so fast...

Edited November 14, 2008 by JosephH

[JosephH]

what's especially disconcerting to me is all this completely cavalier talk of deliberately dumping a panel with it's history.

 

Three parties of free climbers and a few odd aider (give or take a few passings). This panel is definitely a landmark. Somebody should write up an obit.

 

It's not a landmark - it's a possibility. You either value those or you don't...

[ivan]

 

Tangen-Foster and I...

when i read this it makes me think you're climbing w/ a comet

[JosephH]

 

Tangen-Foster and I...

when i read this it makes me think you're climbing w/ a comet

 

I was. His first climb at Beacon was walking down the trail, stopping, looking up at Stone Rodeo and onsight sending what in all likelyhood was the FFA.

[ivan]

that's funny bill!

 

i guess i'm done posting here as joseph is just ignoring my thoughts. not sure how i got sucked into this anyway.

it's all for the greater good of getting me my flamey icon on my tr! this is the edge!!! you can't quit now until we have 1500 views or 100 replies dammit!

 

 

kev, joe is right about the right place to belay from on this pitch (too much of a traverse in the middle of what would be a monster pitch of 60 meters), and probably right about the impending shrapnel not hurting folks below (the belayer would be fine for sure), though i for one was not happy at what i figured would happen to me as the leader if the thing went. a week later though i'm very willing to stick my head back into the cannon though.

 

as far as being a drunken-ape climber, i think i can be plenty delicate if need be joe - i got up that first crux on takes fist that buggered you and that requires plenty of balance and finesse w/o gear to yank on

 

 

[ivan]

 

Tangen-Foster and I...

when i read this it makes me think you're climbing w/ a comet

 

I was. His first climb at Beacon was walking down the trail, stopping, looking up at Stone Rodeo and onsight sending what in all likelyhood was the FFA.

what's the story on his name then? - i was just assumign you were clmbing w/ some man-hating hypenating-chick

 

dammit! all this blather makes me wanna coerce one of my would-be partners tomorrow into ditching the jensen's ridge plan! just so we could get bill's next episode headlines!

[JosephH]

as far as being a drunken-ape climber, i think i can be plenty delicate if need be joe - i got up that first crux on takes fist that buggered you and that requires plenty of balance and finesse w/o gear to yank on

 

Ha, you have me dead to rights there; sorry, I just haven't seen it when it's been on display.

[hemp22]

The differnce is I've only trundled significant rocks that have been absolute death hazard or that are so loose there is no possibility of climbing through / over it safely. I've never in my life deliberately trundled a rock of any significance that was an essential component of a climb.

Joe, I think the point is that you are the one who decided that those rocks were an absolute death hazard, and you are the one deciding that this flake in question is not. As someone alluded to earlier, your "absolute death hazard" is another person's "bomber hold", and your "bomber hold" is another person's "absolute death hazard". There's a level of subjectivity built into your decisions. It's entirely possible that the subjective decisions of others on the same topic will differ from the conclusion that you arrived at. It seems like you may have trouble accepting that.

 

Same thing on the possibility of whether the traverse could be freed once the flake is gone. Your conclusion is "no", but some day a better/stronger climber may come along and decide "yes" and pull the flake and then free it. Even classic climbs with defining features do change over time.

 

So, no matter how many times you re-phrase and re-state your arguments, they don't increase in validity. There's still a level of opinion built in.

 

Now, on to this statement:

And if anyone turned up to climb those lines who had half a brain and was concerned about it they'd go elsewhere for a bit.

Normally, I don't think you're really all that elitist or anything, but the implications of this statement are a little over the top. So, if someone who wants to climb windsurfer sees someone up at the pipeline anchor trying to climb this traverse, and they aren't familiar enough to know that there's a loose flake up there and they should leave, then they only have half a brain? The elitist image that you may need to fight doesn't come from your desire to preserve the rock, or to preserve adventure...it comes from your ability to talk down to or about anyone who doesn't climb as much as you at Beacon, or doesn't have your experience level with those climbs, or style of climbing.

 

Anyway, on the topic at hand, I've never looked at that flake, so my opinion is theoretical based on the description of the situation. What the right answer is in my mind is always going to depend on the unique situation, but my 2 cents is that if the flake can be yarded off the cliff by a climber (either free or aid), either in a stance, or under body weight or pulling, then it should go. But it'd be inappropriate to use a hammer or any other means of mechanical advantage.

There are examples in the area of loose & wiggling blocks on heavily travelled routes that have been there for years, and will continue to be there. So I think if you can't get it off with body weight or a good tug, it isn't going to go anytime soon. (With the caveat that freeze/thaw cycles do have an impact and it'd need to be re-evaluated down the road).

And sure, respecting that the route was accomplished before with the flake in place is important, but when they arrive at a position like that, any self-respecting climber will still value their own life and safety more than they value the history of the route, no matter how classic or obscure the route may be.

 

But in the end, Joseph, if you're attached to the possibility of free climbing the route, and you're worried that someone else freeing or aiding the climb is going to pull that flake off, then it's entirely on you to just get on the route and get it done before anyone else has an impact. Regardless of how many people have travelled over that traverse before, you can't tell someone else to not get on a route, or how to climb a route, just to ensure that it's preserved in the state that you want it. It's not your rock.

[ivan]

as far as being a drunken-ape climber, i think i can be plenty delicate if need be joe - i got up that first crux on takes fist that buggered you and that requires plenty of balance and finesse w/o gear to yank on

 

Ha, you have me dead to rights there; sorry, I just haven't seen it when it's been on display.

and see there mark, we can all get together for a big homo-huddle now - joe can admit he's wrong sometimes!

 

i'm off to the (gay) gym - see all you wankers out there 2morrow

[kevbone]

 

I was. His first climb at Beacon was walking down the trail, stopping, looking up at Stone Rodeo and onsight sending what in all likelyhood was the FFA.

 

Even though McGowen states he has the first FFA.

[JosephH]

Joe, I think the point is that you are the one who decided that those rocks were an absolute death hazard, and you are the one deciding that this flake in question is not. As someone alluded to earlier, your "absolute death hazard" is another person's "bomber hold", and your "bomber hold" is another person's "absolute death hazard". There's a level of subjectivity built into your decisions. It's entirely possible that the subjective decisions of others on the same topic will differ from the conclusion that you arrived at. It seems like you may have trouble accepting that.

If we were talking about a panel or rock with no history I'd agree it's all just a matter of subjective opinion. However, that's not the case here, there is an objective history of travel over this particular section of stone and I (and from the sound of it, Ivan) would go do it again. Also, when I say 'death hazard' I don't mean it in a someone-may-die sort or way, I mean it in a someone-is-going-to-die way - the whole someone-may-die rock I view as more optional as in then don't get on it if you can't deal.

 

Same thing on the possibility of whether the traverse could be freed once the flake is gone. Your conclusion is "no", but some day a better/stronger climber may come along and decide "yes" and pull the flake and then free it. Even classic climbs with defining features do change over time. So, no matter how many times you re-phrase and re-state your arguments, they don't increase in validity. There's still a level of opinion built in.

I agree there is still room for a amount of conjecture, but people who have actually closely examined the panel and climbed over it are probably in a better position to judge what's what then the average person just reading about it. And I don't get on anything like that panel without studying it extremely well before, during, and after in advance of my second following over the same terrain. Fortnuately you're in a good stance to do just that from just immediately above it when doing the climb. In the absense of any clear and concrete indication to the contrary, I'm willing to bet a lead on it being as solid as it ever was.

 

And if anyone turned up to climb those lines who had half a brain and was concerned about it they'd go elsewhere for a bit.

Normally, I don't think you're really all that elitist or anything, but the implications of this statement are a little over the top. So, if someone who wants to climb windsurfer sees someone up at the pipeline anchor trying to climb this traverse, and they aren't familiar enough to know that there's a loose flake up there and they should leave, then they only have half a brain? The elitist image that you may need to fight doesn't come from your desire to preserve the rock, or to preserve adventure...it comes from your ability to talk down to or about anyone who doesn't climb as much as you at Beacon, or doesn't have your experience level with those climbs, or style of climbing.

Well, given you're quoting me, if they "were concerned about it" as I said, then they'd be stupid to walk up and climb there. If anyone walked up while I was on the route and I thought they were in any danger I'd let them know what was happening and ask them to move to say FFA or wait a bit until we're done. If they were either inconsiderate or stupid enough to just pretend like nothing was happening then I'd back off as I wouldn't want to attempt a climb like that around such folks - it would blow the whole energy of the attempt.

 

What the right answer is in my mind is always going to depend on the unique situation, but my 2 cents is that if the flake can be yarded off the cliff by a climber (either free or aid), either in a stance, or under body weight or pulling, then it should go.

And, yet again, given the history and opportunity it presents, I'd say that's a mindlessly inconsiderate perspective particularly when it involves such a spectacular chunk of free climbing...

 

And sure, respecting that the route was accomplished before with the flake in place is important, but when they arrive at a position like that, any self-respecting climber will still value their own life and safety more than they value the history of the route, no matter how classic or obscure the route may be.

The traditional, ever-present, and very sensible option for climbers concerned with the value of their own lives in such situations is either don't leave the belay or retreat - you'll forgive me if I find your argument here, that one should just bulldoze onward at the expense of a fine free climb, a bit troubling.

 

...you can't tell someone else to not get on a route, or how to climb a route, just to ensure that it's preserved in the state that you want it. It's not your rock.

I didn't, I asked that he not to go back up on it if he felt he couldn't manage it without dumping the panel.

[JosephH]

I was. His first climb at Beacon was walking down the trail, stopping, looking up at Stone Rodeo and onsight sending what in all likelyhood was the FFA.

Even though McGowen states he has the first FFA.

Yes, Bob was working on it for a couple of months and I'm pretty sure we inadvertantly got on it in-between their FA and FFA dates at the end of May. We never knew about them and they never knew about us. And whether that was indeed the case or not, walking down and onsighting it in '87, makes him a comet in my book. The next day we walked to the end of the trail and I got on the line above the arena. We were and are pretty much all about roofs so those naturally caught our eyes.

[pink]

this is too much fun

 

 

 

[eldiente]

Quick question, have you guys ever considered how much time you spend talking about Beacon online. Rough guess? Let's try this, every time your tempted to post something about Beacon on CC go do some training. Get a hang-board, do pull-ups, run TR laps, lift weights. You'll be so fucken strong that you'll hike every route out there and even the most obscure line with shaky holds will feel easy for you. Bolts at Beacon, you won't need them as you'll be so strong you'll just run everything out between bomber natural pro. Loose holds, you won't care as those routes are soft and you can just campus past the. I'm not joking, let's try it for 8 weeks and report back to me with your fitness level. I bet you'll add-on at least two full numbers grades by converting Beacon Rock online spray into training time.

 

-Nate

 

 

Edited November 15, 2008 by eldiente

[denalidave]

Quick question, have you guys ever considered how much time you spend talking about Beacon online. Rough guess? Let's try this, every time your tempted to post something about Beacon on CC go do some training. Get a hang-board, do pull-ups, run TR laps, lift weights. You'll be so fucken strong that you'll hike every route out there and even the most obscure line with shaky holds will feel easy for you. Bolts at Beacon, you won't need them as you'll be so strong you'll just run everything out between bomber natural pro. Loose holds, you won't care as those routes are soft and you can just campus past the. I'm not joking, let's try it for 8 weeks and report back to me with your fitness level. I bet you'll add-on at least two full numbers grades by converting Beacon Rock online spray into training time.

 

-Nate

 

Sweet, I'll finally be a solid 5.6 leader once I get my 2 grade advance.

[denalidave]

Hey Pink, isn't it time for your group hug gif?