Jump to content

Angle of the Dangle


mksportn

Recommended Posts

I'm going to bring this topic back up. :o

I think it needs a bolt on roof, to replace the single cam. I'm currently working it, and it's a cool route. But that one piece of gear is all that's stopping you from a 35' grounder off th crux. So the 5kn thin cams aren't really inspiring. Bigger cams are all been in the way of crucial hand jams. I managed to find a offset .5/.4 that seems fairly solid, but it's still pretty nerve racking.

It's a great route, and should see more traffic, but never will with that required cam and being sketchy at that. And I'm not one to be scared of a whip, even on trad gear.

That route has probably only seen a handle of ascents in the past 10 years, which is too bad, but it won't change unless it sees a bolt.

Thoughts?

Anyone know where to get ahold of the FA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Perhaps some climbs should only see a few ascents by those with the skills and boldness to do it. Where is the value of comfortizing a route so more people can do it? Are there not plenty of well bolted routes for those who do not want the risk of trad climbing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I'm not one to be scared of a whip, even on trad gear.

 

Still, there seems to be at least a bit of a contradiction in the desire and the statement.

 

If the route was put up and has subsequently done with the cam placement then it hardly seems like 'traffic' is a good enough reason to add a bolt. In fact, comfortizing / chicken-bolting for the masses really only ends up lowering people's skills overall, not raising them those of people capable of rising to the occasion.

 

Chicken-bolting The Oracle has taken one of the very best and boldest leads in the PDX area and reduced it to just another climb to tick which is a real shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took at 15' fall the other day off the Day of Atonement crux onto a #3 nut (where a ball nut would have fit nicely if I'd brought it, but, it was on the ground :eek: ). Falling onto gear isn't the issue. The issue for me in this case is the for sure ground fall if the cam blew for some reason. And yea, the cam probably isn't going to blow, since I've taken the whip now about 5-6 times now while working the crux that is above that cam. But when the entire rest of the route is bolted, it doesn't make sense to me to have a required trad piece, that if it failed, would cause certain injury.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chicken shit back stabbing and screwing over the climbing community by a certain individual has contributed to closing off 99% of the routes at Beacon to climbing, but the Oracle is a real shame...? That's a good one.

I would say place that bolt at Ozone and don't even think twice about it, it seems to make sense to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm against the bolt. All the ascents so far have not needed one. We all risked the groundfall, because obviously the fixed piece was indeed a POS. We trusted the cam we placed as you have so far. Only you know if it's worth the risk. If it's not -- don't do the climb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe the only thing your responsible for is kissing the Rangers asses and talking shit behind everyone backs, your truly the biggest chicken shit that I have ever meet . Your truly one big pile of shit everyone has too watch out for . So remember watch out don't step on Joe !!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in reply to the last part of your message: So when I climbed up "Angle" the first time, I wasn't going for a "true" onsight? That's interesting - I thought I was. Yes Ozone has lots of bolts - so? Maybe there's room there for a challenge? Something that doesn't involve just hanging off a bolt? I got a good cam placement near the old fixed piece (11/2 friend - I think) and probably could have got more gear there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I took at 15' fall the other day off the Day of Atonement crux onto a #3 nut (where a ball nut would have fit nicely if I'd brought it, but, it was on the ground :eek: ). Falling onto gear isn't the issue. The issue for me in this case is the for sure ground fall if the cam blew for some reason. And yea, the cam probably isn't going to blow, since I've taken the whip now about 5-6 times now while working the crux that is above that cam. But when the entire rest of the route is bolted, it doesn't make sense to me to have a required trad piece, that if it failed, would cause certain injury.

 

I understand the argument, but for me it's a matter of precedence. It's how the route was established and, given it's had many subsequent ascents, I think the route and those leads should be respected. I get that's likely a minority opinion these days, but it doesn't make it any less valid or the opposite opinion any more valid.

 

Joe, you have a knack for turning every thread personal.

 

Not at all, the question was about retrobolting a route to deliberately take the risk out of it. There was nothing whatsoever 'personal' about my answer to Micah, but rather an opinion 'traffic' shouldn't be a criteria in retrobolting a route that has been done many times to-date without the bolt. I'm missing where that is personal. You may take that personally, but that's a different matter altogether. Whether I get on the route or not is another matter as well - the conversation is on retrobolting and everyone should be free to comment on its acceptability, especially so given the fact retrobolting has already moved east fifteen miles with likely pressure for more of the same over the coming years.

 

So you go on about a route you do know - the Oracle - and label it "chicken bolted." I was with Arent when he added the bolts to the Oracle years after he got the FA.

 

Arent got the FA because he was willing to break off the expando flake at the start of the layback while at that time I wasn't quite to that point and was still trying to figure out a way to leave it. I don't in any way begrudge him the FA as I would have come to same conclusion, but it would have taken a couple of more goes before I had.

 

Sure sounds like you are calling Arent chicken for adding a bolt so a 6 inch cam and a 6-4 wingspan aren't required to protect the 10c/d crux of the route.

 

Arent and I traded emails over several years concerning the first bolt which we were in complete agreement on. Arent used a #6 at the first roof while I went with a black metolius just under the roof. I even led it three times each way just to evaluate both options and a bolt (having gone out and bought a #6 for the occasion) so it wasn't idle conjecture: both of our ways sucked at the first roof in terms of foot entanglement and so I actively pinged him numerous times about placing that bolt or marking it and offered to do it myself. In fact, the only reason you were out there doing it with him was I had just pinged him yet again about it offering to do the roof bolt for him if he were too busy. Oh, and no 6-4 wingspan was or is required to protect any part of the route without the bolts.

 

The chicken bolt is the second bolt. The roof bolt doesn't really change the character of the route, the second bolt changes its character completely eliminating the most committing section of the route. I led the route 20+ times without that second bolt and repeatedly asked Arent not to bolt that section even though I supported the roof bolt. I even sent a picture of the pro at that spot - both the pro I used initially and the bomb pro I subsequently found and used. Bomb pro in the layback by the second bolt. Here's the pic I sent him with the old, good-enough placement I used many times (and Hudon called it a 'thing of beaty' when he used it), along with the location of the even better placement:

 

Oracle_pro.jpg

 

Now it's clearly Arent's prerogative to retrobolt it as FA, but the second bolt absolutely robs the character of the route and anyone who thinks they've done the route clipping that chicken bolt has sadly missed out on one of the best routes the Gorge has to offer.

 

I have nothing but respect for Arent's climbing and I'm inclined to believe he did it for the sake of 'traffic' as opposed to no longer being willing to do the route as it was, but again, I find 'traffic', 'open up' and 'comfort' to be perverse rationales for retrobolting and would still urge him to remove it as it's a travesty to what the route's true character offers.

 

While we are at it, how many lead your boltless and R-rated Hollow Victory out there at Drop Zone?

 

Damn few, but it gets done and got done onsight last weekend by a couple of really bold climbers who just saw it and jumped on it - no guidebook. I originally did do one [failed] TR to clean several large rocks at the top of it before leading it and got it on the first lead. I also have to work up to leading it every year and not a single one of the fifty or so leads I've done of it over eight years (last weekend included) has ever been 'casual' in any way. Bottom line is if someone isn't up for the challenge or that level of commitment they shouldn't lead it. If they want to TR it, it's a 5.2 traverse from the Atonement anchor. To be honest, I'm more confused as to why the question isn't "how many are strong enough to lead it" (and kinda wtf, I mean I was 56 when I put it up and will be 64 in August and I still lead it).

 

If the FA party says ok, it's ok. Why does it have to be more complicated?

 

Once established, people leading a route any number of times as is should give a route some independent status quo / weight. Dumbing down challenging and bold routes after they've seen many leads does absolutely no one any favors and simply diminishes the route, the people who do low-commitment leads of them, and ultimately the sport.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy shit. I'm out. Talk about thread hijackers throwing temper tantrums...! Quite astounding really. No wonder we can't make any progress around here.

 

Dave, thanks for your opinion. You're the only one of the replies that has actually climbed it (I'm pretty sure of that) (and probably one of only 5-6 that have ever climbed it). No sweat off my back either way, as hopefully I'll send it this week, downgrade it ;) and then probably never do it again, so my question was more for others who've been asking me about it and want to do it, but don't like the cam.

My personal opinion is that a single required cam on a otherwise bolted route is absolutely ridiculous, but like I said, that's my just my opinion. I get that's a disputed view though.

 

Anyway. Happy climbing. Or bashing on the Internet. Whatever y'all prefer. I'm going to go explore Chimney Rocks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holy shit. I'm out. Talk about thread hijackers throwing temper tantrums...! Quite astounding really. No wonder we can't make any progress around here.

 

Same here, but I will say any and all retrobolting should be open to discussion by everyone without it being considered hijacking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Should be able to soon. One-hung it pretty quickly. Haven't been back yet for the Redpoint. Haha yes, mostly tongue in cheek.

Yea I'm looking forward to climbing out there! Are you familiar with who put up any of the FA's out there?

Edited by mksportn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...