kevbone Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Rumr has to have his ratings to feel good about himself...its that whole ego thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 what are you talking about??? Like i've said all along, its at most a letter grade of difference...my point, is big frickin' deal... Â you're the one who's all uptight about that lameO area ozone vs. beacon...dumbass... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete_H Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Funny, the only common ground reached in this thread, by any of the adversarial contributors, is that Kevbone is a shithead. At least everyone can agree on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Sorry Pete, but I don't agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete_H Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 The exception that makes the rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuMR Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 Sorry Pete, but I don't agree. how much is kevbeenboned paying you?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted June 18, 2009 Share Posted June 18, 2009 When are you two going to meet in the middle for the big posedown in Tenino? I know we could sell tickets and raise some bucks for the Index purchase... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dechristo Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Â Who believes any of his BS, anyway? Â "DeChristo": If you're referring to "pope", you need to sit down, little man. Â Â Â Pitifully pompous prat. Â If your aim is to defend another, bolster that person's strength rather than posture to shield weakness. Â Quit treating the guy like your bitch, Dogberry. Â Â On topic: My perception, generally, is of rock grades being more soft since the advent and proliferation of grades beyond 5.9+. My estimate is one full grade higher on many routes up through 5.11... Â Â and on the two .12s I've climbed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindawg Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Â Who believes any of his BS, anyway? Â "DeChristo": If you're referring to "pope", you need to sit down, little man. Â Â Â Pitifully pompous prat. Â If your aim is to defend another, bolster that person's strength rather than posture to shield weakness. Â Quit treating the guy like your bitch, Dogberry. Â Â On topic: My perception, generally, is of rock grades being more soft since the advent and proliferation of grades beyond 5.9+. My estimate is one full grade higher on many routes up through 5.11... Â Â and on the two .12s I've climbed. Â Who believes any of your BS, anyway? Â Now take your seat... Â Â Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostCamKenny Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 really only cared about grades as a measurement stick   To measure your ego!  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostCamKenny Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 What do the ratings really matter, anyway? Someone who asks this question will undoubtedly be ridiculed for not being able to climb hard enough for it to matter, but really, what's the big deal? Â I started climbing nearly 8 years ago in a gym (as many do these days) and at first I was very concerned with ratings because I thought it was the guide to what I should be climbing. Ratings, instead, have taught me where my limits lie and have shown me what I want to work towards. Since I don't climb on plastic and plywood much anymore I have little to compare my ideas on ratings to. Since sport and trad differ mostly because of the way they are protected then it would seem logical that the rating system reflect that which the two styles have in common - difficulty. Placing gear - perhaps - should be graded for traditionally protected climbs based on how easy the gear is to place, find, and the stance from which is placed. Sport climbs should - likewise - be given a rating for how difficult the moves are from which you must clip the bolt. Both of these would be aside from the difficulty ratings. Of course, getting an entire generation of climbers - or several generations of climbers as the case is here - to agree on such a system would be a bit like trying to get a basketball into a ginger ale bottle, but one can't be shunned for trying to propose an idea, right? Â Reading through all these posts I was agreeing with far too much to quote them all here, but I have to say that me umble opinion is that a rating does more for your head than anything else - though not always in an egotistical way. When you climb a route that's graded, say, 5.10d for the first time and upon completing it you feel that it was challenging and exciting, then your head is telling you that your limits have increased and you are establishing a new plateau for yourself, and you gain confidence. The negative side of this would - of course - be that you are now cockier than you were before and think that you are able to jump whole number grades because you completed a challenging route. But suppose you bail off the same route... what does it do to your head? Do you feel the confidence that you would had you finished the route or are you discouraged by your inability to finish it? Would you think that you still had some work to do before you could top that rating? The feelings from both examples are those that one would have whether you were placing gear or clipping bolts - the adrenaline is going to pump no matter which style you are climbing, so why should the ratings be different for the different styles? Â My point here is that ratings should be given for climbers to evaluate personal progress, set goals, and not to measure your success or reinforce the pressure and breadth behind your spray. I spray, just as most do, and when I say that I did a route rated 5.XX with gear I say it to give an honest representation of my climbing ability. To use ratings in such a way as to intimidate or impress would be against the spirit of what makes climbing fun, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rad Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 According to studies referenced in Performance Rock Climbing, motivation is highest when the chances of success are about 50%. Ratings can actually lower motivation. For example, if you expect a 95% chance of success the focus and motivation may be lowered as you expect to cruise (no way I'll fall on 5.xx). Conversely, if you expect a 95% chance of failure then motivation and focus may also be lowered (I'll probably fall because this is 5.yy).  Some of the most enjoyable routes I've climbed are ones where I did not know the rating beforehand. Removing ratings from the mental equation eliminates some of these unproductive mental preparations. It brings a sharper focus to the onsight (or even TR flash) experience. Sure it's nice to have a sense of whether you're pushing your limits, but you can usually FEEL that, right? For many years, I had this pre-conceived notion that I could not climb 5.11. For that reason, I didn't even try many routes that I probably should have tried. Instead, I should have jumped on some thinking, "this looks tough but I'm feeling good, I'll try to find the best sequences, work the rests, give it all I've got on the cruxes, and see how far I get". Maybe I would've advanced faster instead of staying in my 5.9-10 comfort zone.  Moreover, if we take many routes of the same grade at the same area odds are good that they are not all exactly the same difficulty for the same person. For example, in the past year I've done several 11as at X32, x38, and Index, and I can probably rank all of them in terms of relative difficulty FOR ME. And btw, my combined list would certainly not have all the Index 11as as the hardest or X38 as the easiest. They'd be all mixed up. The two bouldering comps I've been in were fun because there are points assigned to each problem and NO RATING OR GRADE TRANSLATION WAS GIVEN.  One of the great things about climbing is that there are a wide range of styles/routes and moves/skills needed to do them. So rating across types is not just comparing apples and oranges, it's comparing liebacks to jams to slab smearing to crimping/edging to steep jug pulling etc etc etc. Their relative difficulty depends on the relative strengths of the climber. More experienced and accomplished climbers, as noted in other threads, usually obtain proficiency in all areas, a worthy objective. Climbers who stick to one or two styles are staying within their comfort zones, just as I did with grades, and are missing out on a lot of fun climbing. Break on through to the other side....Doors  To me, climbing means solving mental and physical puzzles. That's why it has captivated me more than any other sport I've tried, and I still get excited about every trip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Nice post, Rad. We all want to be challenged, but was also want to believe we have a chance to succeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevbone Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Funny, the only common ground reached in this thread, by any of the adversarial contributors, is that Kevbone is a shithead. At least everyone can agree on that. Â Yo Pety....when you get to 1000 posts we will talk. Â Â Oh and I am more of a tool than a shithead. But thanks for playing..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Funny, the only common ground reached in this thread, by any of the adversarial contributors, is that Kevbone is a shithead. At least everyone can agree on that. Â Sorry Pete, but I don't agree. Â Nor do I. He's not a bad dude at all (off the internet in real life). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted June 22, 2009 Share Posted June 22, 2009 Â Jim Donini is probably manlier than most everyone on this site and it STILL is his day. Â Â Can't disagree with this one. Donini is still in it and on it. No doubt his recent actions as AAC President have helped all climbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostCamKenny Posted June 23, 2009 Share Posted June 23, 2009 According to studies referenced in Performance Rock Climbing, motivation is highest when the chances of success are about 50%. Ratings can actually lower motivation. For example, if you expect a 95% chance of success the focus and motivation may be lowered as you expect to cruise (no way I'll fall on 5.xx). Conversely, if you expect a 95% chance of failure then motivation and focus may also be lowered (I'll probably fall because this is 5.yy). Some of the most enjoyable routes I've climbed are ones where I did not know the rating beforehand. Removing ratings from the mental equation eliminates some of these unproductive mental preparations. It brings a sharper focus to the onsight (or even TR flash) experience. Sure it's nice to have a sense of whether you're pushing your limits, but you can usually FEEL that, right? For many years, I had this pre-conceived notion that I could not climb 5.11. For that reason, I didn't even try many routes that I probably should have tried. Instead, I should have jumped on some thinking, "this looks tough but I'm feeling good, I'll try to find the best sequences, work the rests, give it all I've got on the cruxes, and see how far I get". Maybe I would've advanced faster instead of staying in my 5.9-10 comfort zone.  Moreover, if we take many routes of the same grade at the same area odds are good that they are not all exactly the same difficulty for the same person. For example, in the past year I've done several 11as at X32, x38, and Index, and I can probably rank all of them in terms of relative difficulty FOR ME. And btw, my combined list would certainly not have all the Index 11as as the hardest or X38 as the easiest. They'd be all mixed up. The two bouldering comps I've been in were fun because there are points assigned to each problem and NO RATING OR GRADE TRANSLATION WAS GIVEN.  One of the great things about climbing is that there are a wide range of styles/routes and moves/skills needed to do them. So rating across types is not just comparing apples and oranges, it's comparing liebacks to jams to slab smearing to crimping/edging to steep jug pulling etc etc etc. Their relative difficulty depends on the relative strengths of the climber. More experienced and accomplished climbers, as noted in other threads, usually obtain proficiency in all areas, a worthy objective. Climbers who stick to one or two styles are staying within their comfort zones, just as I did with grades, and are missing out on a lot of fun climbing. Break on through to the other side....Doors  To me, climbing means solving mental and physical puzzles. That's why it has captivated me more than any other sport I've tried, and I still get excited about every trip.  Very well said, Rad. I agree about the mental problem solving - I, too, like to look at climbs as puzzles to solve... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.