Charlie Posted October 1, 2001 Author Posted October 1, 2001 thanks for the backup cc- but im not in the getting angry and ripping heads off business, im more into climbing with friends and having a good time. i guess this is my cue to get off of this site and do something constructive.....seeya Quote
jblakley Posted October 1, 2001 Posted October 1, 2001 Sexual Chocolate (what the f*** kind of alias is that?) Charlie is indeed a big dude and a nice guy. One of my favorite climbing partners actually. Ok maybe he's a little cranky today but he's a standup guy and he does not hide behind an alias. Everyone also knows who Caveman is. So I guess my point is if your going to start hammering someone at least put your real name in your profile. I think there is a certain integrity to not spraying from behind a pseudonym. So before you spray further introduce yourself at least. Just my humble opinion though. Jim Blakley Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted October 1, 2001 Posted October 1, 2001 Ah yes! Thanks Captain Caveman, for the warnings on violence! Would've expected that from a Neanderthal. (GRRRRRR.) And Charley, just a thought: before you go slamming someone for voicing their opinion in response to your thread, check your head. Read your initial reply to my initial posts; maybe you'll see my reason for being pissed. And now we seem to get to the real issue: yes, many enjoy climbing hard, damn hard, as hard as they feckin' can! And yeah, then they even have the NERVE to talk about it! Absolutely! I'm damn psyched about how hard I climb, 'cause I have a blast pushing myself, and doing things I only dreamed of in the past. And I'm damn psyched for anyone who's doing the same. And as you pout away, perhaps you could even have the decency to apologize, 'cause your sanctimony certainly warrants it. Quote
Charlie Posted October 1, 2001 Author Posted October 1, 2001 OK, i just read this post through. I was wrong for snapping the whole 23 cents comment. sexual stated that he did not own the book or ever want to own it. but, if i wanted he would give his opinion on a certain route- that's not what i was after. i just thought that everyone who owned guidebooks that were specialized in a particular climbing area could input any mistakes they have found. that way, everyone who owned the smoot guide could pencil in the corrections and we could all own a fairly accurate guide to all the climbing areas listed for washington...anyone who did not want to participate could simply click off and move to the next post- sounded like a good idea at the time, sorry it didnt work out.....how can you climb harder than you ever have before if you don't know how hard the route is you are climbing- or how hard the routes you previously climbed were? [This message has been edited by Charlie (edited 10-01-2001).] Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted October 2, 2001 Posted October 2, 2001 Hi Charlie. Thanks. And sorry for going so off on ya. Got tweaked. I am a sensitive piece of chocolate sometimes. French chocolate. And then when sexuality gets thrown into the mix... volatility. And your last point: that was the reason for my grade input. To solidify a consensus. So that people have an idea of what they are climbing. Hence, my input on Rainy Day Women et al. I don't really like the down-rating that happens sometimes, down-rating that's based on people getting things wired and then down-rating the route. Rainy... is NOT 11c. It simply isn't. It is harder. And I feel Hung Out to Dry's difficulty is more accurately, again, denoted by its original rating. Two routes, ORIGINALLY rated harder than what Smoot says. No spray here, just an attempt to create an intelligent consensus based on as much objectivity as possible, NOT peoples strange motives to down-grade certain Little Si routes. These are the first routes that many people will climb at these grades; let's not sand-bag them. I've climbed a lot of routes at a lot of different locales; this is why I feel as I do on this one. If I misunderstood the reason for your post, then a coherent explanation as to WHY would have sufficed. But anyways, I hope there are no hard feelings. I know a lot was said; hopefully it can be forgotten. Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted October 2, 2001 Posted October 2, 2001 Rainy Day Women at Little Si. He claims 11c. The original rating of 11d/12a seems more accurate. Hung Out to Dry, Little Si. 12b is better than 12a, thinks I. Can't think of any other disagreements. I don't own the book. Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted October 2, 2001 Posted October 2, 2001 Also, Californicator should only be 12c, while the extension, Californication, should be 12d. Quote
Charlie Posted October 2, 2001 Author Posted October 2, 2001 retro- was just looking through the frenchman coulee guidebook- you the man! Looks like you've put up a lot of hard cracks there. Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted October 2, 2001 Posted October 2, 2001 But he didn't do them from the ground up. I heard he rap-cleaned and rehearsed them first. Quote
Bob_Clarke Posted October 2, 2001 Posted October 2, 2001 Hey Charlie, It seems lately the folks producing guide books are playing around with the ratings. (save your breath everyone, I know they're subjective) For istance "The Travelers Guide" is a nice selection of quality routes, however most of the ratings have been downgraded. Some of them not fair to the bright eyed bushy tailed enthusiastic newby. I do not know Smoot, just that his books haven't always been of the highest quality. (for a quality guide thumb through A Rock Climbers Guide to Smith Rock) Quote
Charlie Posted October 2, 2001 Author Posted October 2, 2001 i recently bought the ROCK CLIMBING WASHINGTON book by Jeff Smoot- I noticed several incorrect ratings of climbs (in the areas i was very familiar with) in frenchman coulee and lworth. This could be a problem if you are using the book in an area new to you. How about posting the mistakes and giving the correct ratings so we can make revisions? [This message has been edited by Charlie (edited 10-01-2001).] Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted October 2, 2001 Posted October 2, 2001 Jes' kiddin' 'bout "Cali..."; original ratings are right on. 12d and 13a. Jes' flippin' some flak to sum won. Quote
sexual_chocolate Posted October 2, 2001 Posted October 2, 2001 What are some controversial ratings in the book? I don't have it or want it, but I'll put my two cents in.... Well? Lemme go at 'em. Quote
Drederek Posted October 3, 2001 Posted October 3, 2001 Jblakley I climbed those two routes a month or so ago and started a thread to get some info. Viktor replied but knew only that someone he knew put them up. I guessed the right one might be 5.10 and the left a grade harder. They are really very short - so I wouldn't be surprised if they get easier ratings. Quote
ScottP Posted October 3, 2001 Posted October 3, 2001 quote: Originally posted by Cpt.Caveman: I found a lot of the ratings are pretty close at Lworth and Index as well as Tieton since they match Yosemite. I'm curious as to what you mean by "since they match Yosemite". Â Quote
jblakley Posted October 3, 2001 Posted October 3, 2001 Thanks Drederick, I only did the left one and guessed it at maybe mid 10? I don't know I'm shitty with ratings. The left one is definitely a 2 or 3 move wonder. How's the right one? Quote
Charlie Posted October 3, 2001 Author Posted October 3, 2001 damn you guys for reoppening this thread, im trying to forget about it. scott- you know exactly what the caveman meant(a 5.8 at those places is of similar difficulty as one in yosemite) stop antagonizing him. Quote
jblakley Posted October 3, 2001 Posted October 3, 2001 Thanks Drederick, I only did the left one and guessed it at maybe mid 10? I don't know I'm shitty with ratings. The left one is definitely a 2 or 3 move wonder. How's the right one? Quote
ScottP Posted October 3, 2001 Posted October 3, 2001 quote: Originally posted by Charlie: damn you guys for reoppening this thread, im trying to forget about it. scott- you know exactly what the caveman meant(a 5.8 at those places is of similar difficulty as one in yosemite) stop antagonizing him. I did not know what he meant and I'm not antogaonizing anybody. Originally posted by Cpt.Caveman: I found a lot of the ratings are pretty close at Lworth and Index as well as Tieton since they match Yosemite. The ratings at those three areas are similar because they match Yosemite? That didn't make sense to me so I asked for clarification. If I wanted to antagonize I would have said something like, "Yeah, right. Show me a 5.6 chimney pitch at any of those locations that is of the same difficulty as those on the upper DNB." But I didn't. Â Quote
jblakley Posted October 3, 2001 Posted October 3, 2001 quote: Originally posted by texplorer: When is this thread going to end? In answer to question...NEVER. I wrote a script that will automatically log in every ten minutes and post a nonsensical spew of ASCII garbage to this topic thus pushing this thread to the top forever!! a ha ha ha ha..a ha ha <evil laughter> Signed Dr Evil  Quote
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.