Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

Should you put climbs up for others?


n00bpwn3r

29-Mar-2007
8:11:35 PM

Put the route up in any style you want, it's then up to people to CHOOSE if they wish to repeat it in the same style.


dave h.

29-Mar-2007
8:50:40 PM

Anthony,

if he wants to run it out, and skips a clip, then he's got his run out until he gets to the next bolt ... if he wants a bigger run out he can skip that bolt too... and if he hits a lowish crux after skipping two bolts then I dare say things would get rather interesting.

I scared myself witless after skipping a clip (3rd I think it was) at Mt York in the Bluies. I couldn't easily down climb to it, and had ground fall potential... One clip can make a big difference.

Ronny

29-Mar-2007
9:22:47 PM

On 29/03/2007 anthonyk wrote:
>On 29/03/2007 dave h. wrote:
>>without meaning to be combative.... it's not like anyone's forcing you
>>to clip every bolt. You can run out sport routes if you so choose...
>
>you know thats a pretty silly argument. its a totally different line
>if there's bolts on it or not. yes its psychological, but thats what life
>is.
>
Its silly for more than just the psychological aspect. People say this sort of thing alot - (with respect) its complete bollocks. It is completely different to be run out on a route and not sure where your next gear is coming from or whether its coming at all, to knowing that if it all gets just a bit too hairy you'll just clip that bolt next to you.

Yeah Neil you're right that there are a far greater proportion of people climbing in the upper grades putting up routes. But is this thread about 'should you go out and bolt new routes, in a safe maner, that you otherwise wouldn't go and do for the benefit of others?' or 'when climbing a new route (that you've picked for whatever reason) should you always seek to ensure that it is accessible, or just climb it however you think?'

If its the first question, then for sure - good on anyone who makes the effort to put up routes like this. I'm not so sure about the second though.

James

kieranl

29-Mar-2007
9:50:13 PM

Should you put up climbs for others?
It depends in what sense you mean.
In some cases I try to ensure that other climbers experience the same terror that I felt on the first ascent. This is usually unsuccessful because most climbers are better than me :)


brat

29-Mar-2007
9:51:48 PM

I must have missed the point, when i climb trad I place gear to minimise my injuries, ie if I can't hit anything and my placements are reasonably bomber i don't mind running it out, if i can hit a ledge or deck out etc then I place gear to stop that from happening!

I thought it reasonable to assume that same would apply to bolting, regardless of grade!

Onsight

29-Mar-2007
11:27:25 PM

On 29/03/2007 n00bpwn3r wrote:
>Put the route up in any style you want, it's then up to people to CHOOSE
>if they wish to repeat it in the same style.

Generally/ideally I'd prefer to repeat a route ground-up, onsight. This is usually better style than the FA as many routes are pre-inspected and rap-bolted. If the opportunity is used to place decent gear and onsight climber is considered then I think that is good. But I think it is crap when top-roping and/or pre-inspection is used to contrive "boldness" and excessive run-outs. What’s excessive? That’s debatable!


Phil S

30-Mar-2007
12:35:17 AM

There have to be those routes, the ones we walk past time after time at our favourite crags, that time
after time we decide not to attempt. I like to be able to leave certain routes for later (trusting that they will
not be altered) - in the hope of a stronger, braver me.

I'm happy to accept that I will never climb a whole load of routes at all sorts of grades because there are
lots of them and I'm not brave enough often enough and I like to climb sport routes and I want to learn to
jamb and I get injured and OH! So many things to climb! All the amazing variety! So many things to
aspire to! Hallajuya!!!

(I think everyone should just prepare routes in a way that they can reasonably justify)

simey

30-Mar-2007
8:15:33 AM

On 29/03/2007 Onsight wrote:
>Generally/ideally I'd prefer to repeat a route ground-up, onsight. This is usually better style than the FA as many routes are pre-inspected and rap-bolted... I think it is crap when top-roping and/or pre-inspection is used to contrive "boldness"...

My sentiments exactly.

However if someone establishes a bold route without rap-inspection or top-rope rehearsal, then I am full of admiration for the style.

But not all bold routes established in impeccable style should be immune from potential retro-bolting down the track. However I think such routes should be left a few decades before such action is taken. Routes have a first ascent history, but they also have a repeat ascent history which needs to be taken into account. Some bold routes become reverred, while others are completely forgotten about (despite the fact that they might be reasonable routes).

simey

30-Mar-2007
8:24:32 AM

On 29/03/2007 hipster wrote:
>Macca,
>How about keeping your opinions to yourself until the debate next weekend!!
>Simey reads these threads every day...what else do you do in Nati, apart from climb, surf, skate, footy, cricket etc.. Don't give him any food for thought.
>Your team-mate Ado

Ado... forget about providing us with extra ammunition for this debate. We've already got enough to wipe the floor with you guys. Jeez, your whole team is a liability, particularly Warwick Baird trying to justify hijacking some of the best walls in the Blueys with his dodgy efforts. You guys will be copping it worse than Natimuk Reserves in footy.

PS. Should anyone wish to contribute to the ever growing list of shonky tactics employed by Adrian Lang, Warwick Baird or Macca... please feel free to post here or PM me.

simey

30-Mar-2007
8:42:47 AM

On 29/03/2007 One Day Hero wrote:
>What side of the debate is Simey on???
>
>He talks the tough guy talk, but all of his routes which I've tried have been very well protected.

Do I talk the tough guy talk?

Well it should be obvious from my last two postings what side of the debate I am on.

By the way, I'm all in favour of creating routes with character. Claw was the master at this... his routes might have been full skanky fixed mank, but there was always something to back-up the skanky fixed mank.


Robb

30-Mar-2007
9:04:17 AM

On 30/03/2007 simey wrote:
>On 29/03/2007 Onsight wrote:
>>Generally/ideally I'd prefer to repeat a route ground-up, onsight. This
>is usually better style than the FA as many routes are pre-inspected and
>rap-bolted... I think it is crap when top-roping and/or pre-inspection
>is used to contrive "boldness"...
>
>My sentiments exactly.
>
>However if someone establishes a bold route without rap-inspection or
>top-rope rehearsal, then I am full of admiration for the style.
>
>But not all bold routes established in impeccable style should be immune
>from potential retro-bolting down the track. However I think such routes
>should be left a few decades before such action is taken. Routes have a
>first ascent history, but they also have a repeat ascent history which
>needs to be taken into account. Some bold routes become reverred, while
>others are completely forgotten about (despite the fact that they might
>be reasonable routes).
>
spot on simey and simon


disciple of da wood

30-Mar-2007
9:20:02 AM

i find it interesting that in two pages of discussion no-one has mentioned respecting the ethic of the climbing area. some places are special because they are bold and because you have to pack your balls as well as your RPs and small wires.

by way of example anyone who has gone to moonaire and ticked buckets of gism but not downwind or pine crack have completely missed the point.

i do however agree that the style should count cause tough roping the crap out of something before putting up a "bold" route has never sat well with me!

owl

30-Mar-2007
5:39:29 PM

Has anyone ever put up a climb for someone else? New climbs are put up by people for the glory, not for other people. Of course if you want to share the glory you are better off doing a climb that everone will love, otherwise there won't be anyone to verify how great your climb is!


IdratherbeclimbingM9

30-Mar-2007
5:47:09 PM

>New climbs are put up by people for the glory not for other people.
Not always true.
I climb for myself (the cameraderie of the rope etc), & not 'others'. I have put up many obscure routes (both free and aid); many of which are not written up in guides.


Chuck Norris

30-Mar-2007
8:39:49 PM

my two bob...i think i'm with da wood, but i'll express it different....if the climb you are going to put up will
increase the experience of climbing at that particular cliff then go for it. Sounds simple enough, and
ironically I think most routes are put up 'really' believing that... but the problem is that some people that
put up routes don't understand what the wider world appreciates about the cliff, and ego overrides value
to the detriment of all.

Not that ego is all bad, for aussie style top down routes i've always thought it was the first ascensionists
compensating factor for the guilt of preinspection ;)


Macciza

30-Mar-2007
8:53:37 PM

>What side of the debate is Simey on???
I've been wondering that myself . . Did you guys misunderstand the question . . .?

> Wipe the floor with us . . ?
We will be at the chains, mate - You'll still be on the ground . .

>the ever growing list . .
Stop feeding it BS . .;-}

If you'd like to make it a 'debate for others and not just yourself' feel free; you have plenty of rope . . .


anthonyk

31-Mar-2007
5:11:45 PM

maybe this isn't much of a point but for some routes there is also an option of setting up a top rope. sure its not glorious but does let people enjoy climbing the route if the original style is too much for them. yes its a different climb to leading it (especially if its a heinous lead), but its another way of enjoying the climb. i'd like to hear arguments against that aren't just prejudice..

One Day Hero

2-Apr-2007
2:40:00 PM

On 30/03/2007 simey wrote:

>Do I talk the tough guy talk?
>
>Well it should be obvious from my last two postings what side of the debate
>I am on.

Yeah, I reckon you hang a fair bit of shit on sporty climbers and project a bit of tough guy stuff in the process (not that that's a bad thing).

From the things you write on chocky, I see you as occupying the sensible middle ground between the right wing, stainless warriors and the no-bolt, barefoot hippies.

Rather than airing your dry wit and rational arguements as a participant in the debate, it might be more fun if you referee a WWF style smackdown between the Monty and Macca.


muki

2-Apr-2007
2:53:59 PM

OW! Monty would get pasted


anthonyk

2-Apr-2007
7:45:19 PM

On 2/04/2007 One Day Hero wrote:
>On 30/03/2007 simey wrote:
>Rather than airing your dry wit and rational arguements as a participant
>in the debate, it might be more fun if you referee a WWF style smackdown
>between the Monty and Macca.

aw man.. can we change the discussion at the climbing festival to a tag-team WWF style smackdown? pleeeeeaaaasssseeeeeee?

There are 145 messages in this topic.