Ajfclark wrote: I'm interested how someone establishing a route gives them a better idea of route quality. I would've thought climbing many routes in many different places would give you a better idea of route quality.
Its more about whose opinion I respect, the relationship I have with them and their reputation and pioneering efforts , than the actual issue of route quality. If you came up to me and said half my routes at Hillwood are shit, I would say go f..k yourself; I enjoyed establishing them.
But if I got to know you a bit and shared a few beers around a campfire, and learnt about your climbing experiences, and realized you've got a few runs on the board in terms of cliff development, and that you'd travelled widely, and that you can put your case in a reasonable manner, then I might be more inclined to listen to your opinion.
People with a few new routes to their name do have more credibility in my book, because they understand the effort that goes into a route. The people that annoy me are the pricks that come along and whinge and say `oh its a bit dirty, or the bolts in the wrong place, or the moves don't flow, or the access is shit', and you know they are locals who've made hardly any effort to develop the sport, or visitors like One Day Donkey Boy who just spray criticism. Their opinion lacks credibility in my eyes.
Case in point; I was raving about my effort in putting up the Whiskey Jim Crack (25), a splitter crack through a 9m roof and gave it 3 stars. HB onsighted it, had no qualms with the grade, but said it was a bit dirty and more like one star. I respect his opinion because of his climbing resume, his reputation and because I've climbed with him many times and he's a mate of mine.
So the pioneers of Tassie climbing I mentioned earlier, I know most of them personally or by reputation; and it is their opinion who I would respect more than others, because of my relationship with them, or their pioneering efforts which speak for themselves. |