old school climbers vs. sport climbers

[Cpt.Caveman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Puget:

Bronco - Thanks for the help! So do you think that any route that uses only bolts for pro is a sport climb?

---

Hmm interesting. Goes back to Bachar Yerian question then.....

[Peter_Puget]

Bonco - What if the bolt protected section was continuous and located at either the begining or end of the climb? Would it still be proper (using logic that is) to use your definition?

[Cpt.Caveman]

Peter are you writing a climbing book terms and definitions for the Mountaineers?

[Peter_Puget]

Nope just trying to figure out what you guys really think.

[Bronco]

Sorry Peter for the insincere remarks, but, I don't really know/care where the line is (if there is one).

[Cpt.Caveman]

Well I don't think we know what we think

I would guess if it has injury or death potential even when clipping every bolt properly then it is not a sport climb. but that is me.

[Bronco]

and stop following me!

[Cpt.Caveman]

The final question is what would make us experts at identifying this?

[Peter_Puget]

Just seems like sport climbers here get called all sorts of names. Bolters get slammed and yet nobody has any clear idea of what they are talking about. And most responses are logically inane and contradictory. I would like just one person slamming sport climbing or bolting to write their reasoning in an honest attempt at being cogent and logical. Retro won't even respond to my questions shown above. and yet takes it upon himself to be a rock policeman. Its all a show.

I have done Swim and except for the one pitch needing pro I'd say yep it be a sport route. This year I have also removed about ten bolts from the rock that I felt were inappropriately placed. I didn't smash hangers, insult clases of peoples or brag online but I did talk to the guys who placed them.

[Bronco]

doh! Sorry Peter! uncalled for smartassnes fanning the flames! I will leave it alone.

[This message has been edited by Bronco (edited 10-04-2001).]

[Cpt.Caveman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Puget:

Just seems like sport climbers here get called all sorts of names. Bolters get slammed and yet nobody has any clear idea of what they are talking about. And most responses are logically inane and contradictory. I would like just one person slamming sport climbing or bolting to write their reasoning in an honest attempt at being cogent and logical. Retro won't even respond to my questions shown above. and yet takes it upon himself to be a rock policeman. Its all a show.

I have done Swim and except for the one pitch needing pro I'd say yep it be a sport route. This year I have also removed about ten bolts from the rock that I felt were inappropriately placed. I didn't smash hangers, insult clases of peoples or brag online but I did talk to the guys who placed them.

---

Good for you. Ask Retro what he thinks not what I think he thinks.

[Dru]

So far this year I have climbed ~30 new pitches and placed 3 bolts. is it Ok to brag about it online? how many bolts should i place per pitch to meet the bragging requirement?

MOMMY we go home now?

[Peter_Puget]

I must say I am a bit let down wrote that elevator ride to Starbucks back to the puter and I only hooked two fish! But I did get a hook rare Canadian!

[Dru]

A serious response for PP: IMHO, a sport climb is one where all falls can be taken "safely" and natural protection is not required. I include those routes where one piece of gear is required as sport climbs because on most of them skipping the gear placement does not make the resultant potential fall unsafe - like Plumline at Skaha, for instance.

On the other hand a climb like Jugular Vein in Cheakamus Canyon, requires about 10m of crack climbing to reach the upper 20m bolt protected face, so even though it is mostly bolt protected, it is still a "trad climb" to me, because the gear cannot safely be skipped. But, Pope would probably call it a sport climb (I'm guessing), because the bolts were placed on rappel with a power drill...hehehe.

My favorite definition of a "trad climb" is any route a self-defined sport climber won't climb

[This message has been edited by Dru (edited 10-04-2001).]

[Dru]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Puget:

I must say I am a bit let down wrote that elevator ride to Starbucks back to the puter and I only hooked two fish! But I did get a hook rare Canadian!

---

 

Hee hee. Fair and square on that one.

 

[MysticNacho]

Doh! I hope Dwayner doesn't flunk me now

[Peter_Puget]

I am inclined to agree with you with a reservation - not sure what safely means? I do know someone who took a huge fall on the Bachar Yerian and was unhurt? And I have heard othe rothers doing the same yet I am not convinced it is a sport route. I know two people who have been hurt on the same route at Smith yet I am convinced it is a sport route! I think route finding is a critical issue. Usually I think of route finding being a non issue on sport routes. Thats why I consider Swim basically a sport route. I have been on many a Meadows route only to find myself 20' or 30' off to the side of a bolt. On those routes route finding is important despite fixed pro.

[Dru]

safely - no consequences. many of the smith routes are kinda runout for modern sport climbs. Ive seen people using cheater sticks to make every clip

but if you can 1) hit a ledge, 2) hit the deck, 3) take a cheese grater, 4) swing into a wall, spike, or block, then at minimum it may have been INTENDED to be a sport climb but the first ascencionist fucked it up! better add a bunch more bolts to make it safe, sport climber!

[Peter_Puget]

Dru - I think the idea of

[Peter_Puget]

Dru - I think the idea of no consequences is a tough ideal to reach. I once heard a climber exclaim that a fall was "no problem." The very next fall he broke his leg. I think climbing is inherently dangerous. But I do agree that one of the goals of sport climbing is to limit danger.

[forrest_m]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Peter Puget:

Forrest –

Since the bolting question has been killed would you please provide the definitive answers to my three questions? I must have missed them while the debate raged!

---

PP - although I am all knowing and all powerful, I choose not to provide you with the definitive answers to your open ended questions. ;-)

I'm not dissing your posts or the seriousness of the issues you are raising, I just feel that they have been discussed as nauseum lately, and it seems to me that you and some other posters use even the most tangential link to drag threads onto the bolting soap box. Again, these are important issues, but I thought that in this case, MN had started the much more entertaining thread of "why do old-school climbers dis on sport climbers." If you want to make a serious discussion out of it, you could inquire into why some people define themselves as sport climbers or "trad" climbers, but I think the discussion of "what is a sport climb" is boring.

 

[Dru]

in reply to forrest I think trad climbers generally tend to be more conservative and resent the newer breed of climbers, so they align them selves with older values and positions. except for the "new breed" trad climbers like Marc Twight who attempt to make traditional values out to be new and different, like the latest revolution in style.

sport climbers used to be the latest revolution in style. and many gym climbers still seem to think it is. but the hippest of the hip is bouldering nowadays. sport climbing is so 5 minutes ago, so 20th century. get with the new times!

bouldering is trendy and most boulderers are trendies trying to look hip. hence the baggy pants and toques,"yo".

aid climbing... hey this isn't the 70's anymore. even the new trads like Twight dis aid climbing big walls as guaranteed out come climbing. but it s so easy to make a film of it and stroke your sponsors!!

old school ice. with the new gear anybody even a fat 75 year old grandma can climb WI6. so what's the point? all those pillars are basically identical anyways.

new school ice - sport climbers desperate to latch onto some cool cause sport climbing is so 5 minutes ago. but sport climbing with tools and crampons over your lycra is not any cooler except in the temperature department.

mountaineering - just for those who thought vertical limit was cool. glacier plodding requires no skill and cannot be called climbing. all other mountaineering is just some combination of the above disciplines which i already dissed.

so, all climbing is worthless. see ya at the crags. i'll be the one with the bouldetring mat and bent-shaft tools, yo.

[Peter_Puget]

Forrest -

The initial post in the thread was about sport climbers being “dissed.” The next two posts slammed bolting. I suggested in my post that the bolting thing is a cover for something else. (Snippet from my post: “In earlier posts I have suggested that in fact the bolting debate is often the cover for some deeper motivation. Look at the personal nature of the replies to your post. I’ll let you decide for yourself.”) You suggested two other non-bolt related factors as the motivating factor - in essence concurring with my statement. I asked my three questions with the certain knowledge that I would receive few if any replies. This issue is far from dead. Bringing up bolting was certainly not tangential to this issue. I though before I defined myself as either a “trad” or “sport” climber I ought to know what exactly I am talking about.

 

[forrest_m]

PP - Actually, my feeling is that very few climbers with a broad range of experience would choose to define themselves in such limited terms as "trad" or "sport", whether or not they engage in sport climbing or some other facet of the sport. So I was implying that the people who do (self) define themselves as "sport climbers" are very often people with less experience and therefore much of the abuse that they suffer is the veteran-novice razzing that happens in any activity, made more complicated by the fact that many "old-school" climbers are disconcerted by the incredibly fast progression through the grades that most people make today (compared to 15 or 30 years ago.)

Obviously the bolting issues you raise are far from settled. I'm just saying that it's getting a little ridiculous around here that everytime someone says "quickdraw", the thread turns into "Dan's Dreadful Direct Part XVIII"

[Peter_Puget]

I agree with you that bolting debate gets tedious. Mostly its tedious because its not an honest one. I think if you looked thru my posts you will see that I usually am responding to the issue once it has been brought up not the instigator. I also agree with you that there are hidden motivations on the part of many of the anti bolters. In fact I have not really been arguing the bolt issue so much as arguing that there is really no debate merely insult. It isnt just age that create "trads" however since I have been climbing more years than many of the posters here have been alive. Climbing is resplendent in its divergence.

Instead of saying something is "boring" engage in a discussion - I think your implication was non existent but it would have been a welcome additon to the discussion had it been stated.