[miso soup]

...Rich Simpsons weirdly secretive 'hidden flashes'...

what's this?

[Bonjoy]

You seem happy that history is written by those who shout loudest, fair enough - personally I'd rather have a more objective version of the truth.

I’m not sure Stu or anyone else has suggested they’re happy that publicity is a function of personal brand promotion, rather that it’s just the way it is and has been for a long time. Things like Jack’s articles help raise the profile of onsighters, but in the main mags will churn out the information they get sent, so like it or lump it it’s largely up to the individuals to sell themselves.
In the long run hopefully we’ll see modern versions of books like Welsh Rock which give a more detailed objective account of history. Blogs by activists would certainly be more useful for whoever ends up writing these than short reports in mags or even twenty/thirty year old memories.

...Rich Simpsons weirdly secretive 'hidden flashes'...

what's this?

[slackline]

...Rich Simpsons weirdly secretive 'hidden flashes'...

what's this?

Don't start 

[Stu Littlefair]

If only it was as 'simple' as you suggest - ground up/onsight ascents often happen randomly; the chances of there being a photographer around when s/he is needed is unlikely.

The same could be said of headpoint ascents - of the many days spent on a route you can't be sure which is the 'one'. I suspect the truth is something else, which brings us to...

It seems that those who have played up to the media the most in the last 10-15 years have also been strong proponents of the headpoint ethic. I would draw conclusions from that, but you'd probably accuse me of being a cynic.

No - I'd accuse you of being bang on the money. This complex interplay between levels of pimping, ego and climbing style is the reason that headpoint ascents have been prevalent in the media. At the risk of banging so hard I break my drum, changing the grading system won't affect that interplay one iota, but it will leave us with an unwieldy mish-mash of grading systems.

You seem happy that history is written by those who shout loudest, fair enough - personally I'd rather have a more objective version of the truth.

A nice straw man there Simon We're not really discussing history are we - we're talking about 'fame'. It's too early to say what history will record as the more important ascents of our generation. Also, I wouldn't say I'm happy about the situation, just trying to point out how I see that situation, and some remedies that would be more effective than meddling with the grading system. As you point out, Jack and the web-based media are doing their bit to redress the balance and I think that's great. I do wish they'd stop banging on about this tiresome H-grade bollocks along the way though.

[Pantontino]

If only it was as 'simple' as you suggest - ground up/onsight ascents often happen randomly; the chances of there being a photographer around when s/he is needed is unlikely.

The same could be said of headpoint ascents - of the many days spent on a route you can't be sure which is the 'one'.

As long as you are on the route a pic can be taken, and a headpointer operating at their limit will be on the route several days a week, often for weeks on end. It has also been common for folk to go back afterwards for a staged pic in the sun, which always made me chuckle as anybody with half a brain would wait until a route had gone into the shade before potentially putting their life on the line. I guess we all like a nice sunny/high contrast action shot though (I know I do).

changing the grading system won't affect that interplay one iota, but it will leave us with an unwieldy mish-mash of grading systems.

Not even one iota - surely you don't actually believe that? Take away the kudos of the massive E grade and immediately the headline potential of an ascent is seriously weakened. (Put yourself in an editor's position and just think that scenario through.)

[Stu Littlefair]

I stand by the 'not one iota' comment. It's the only logical conclusion from the current state of affairs: the media's relative treatment of sport climbing, bouldering, ice climbing and trad climbing are not set by the 'juicyness' of the grading system or the mathematical sizes of the numbers contained within. Instead, it is dictated by the impressiveness of the ascent, modified by the perceived interest of that discipline to the readership.

In the same way, adopting a separate grading scheme for headpointed routes is not going to make them any less hard, and thus no less attractive to magazine editors who want to pimp the "world's hardest traditional route". The rags will trumpet the next top-end headpoint just the same, and include text along the lines of "which might translate as E13 in the onsight grading system". In fact, you might end up with onsight ascents being devalued as any conversion between E-grades and your new headpoint system which appeared in print would be at the mercy of journalists, instead of top climbers with reputations to protect. This would allow rampant speculation as to the equivalent E-grade. Think how puny an E8 onsight is going to look if Mick Ryan can get away with saying that echo wall could be as hard as E14!

[nic mullin]

Being as the difference between onsighting and headpointing has been discussed ad nauseum (in the mags, on the web, in the pub, at the crag) as has the difference between UK grades and french grades, people must know by now what constitutes "impressive" in either style and either system - it's been being debated constantly for literally decades. If we change the system around now, we'll only have to wade through all this crap again with the new system. Why bother when everybody knows the difference?

Also who's going to volunteer for the job of updating all the guidebooks as all the routes change from F7b+ X to E8 6c - it's a pointless and thankless task.

If there's a difference in the level of coverage it lies with the editors or those who chose to report their ascents (or not). Are there any would be pros out there who are onsighting away, getting photos, writing articles, posting on blogs yet don't recieve any recognition or new shoes because they're being pushed out by coverage of headpoints?

[IanP]

Not even one iota - surely you don't actually believe that? Take away the kudos of the massive E grade and immediately the headline potential of an ascent is seriously weakened. (Put yourself in an editor's position and just think that scenario through.)

But why does British trad climbing need the kudos of the massive E grade?  Worldwide sport climbing seems to have taken its time to move from 9a to 9b in the 17 years from 1991 to 2008 while on the surface E grades 'seem' to be accelerating ever upwards. 

[Moo]

Think how puny an E8 onsight is going to look if Mick Ryan can get away with saying that echo wall could be as hard as E14!

Hmmmmm, Cockfax Ryan  , dick he maybe, has been one of the prime movers behind the fairer reporting at UKClimbing.com.

In fact, having just read the Wainright article he is quoted in the first paragraphs as inspiring Adam to write his article in the first place.

[GCW]

...Rich Simpsons weirdly secretive 'hidden flashes'...

The board's called, Shooting the Shit, grimer, not Stirring the Shit.

[Oli]

Worldwide sport climbing seems to have taken its time to move from 9a to 9b in the 17 years from 1991 to 2008 while on the surface E grades 'seem' to be accelerating ever upwards. 

Surely that's because there are more variables in trad climbing that combine to give a grade? In sport climbing the change in grade is ultimately caused by the level of difficulty, where as in trad, danger and risk plays a key factor in attributing grades. So while for sport routes it gets exponentially harder to reach the next grade, for trad someone can do something of the same grade but in a far more serious position to be able to suggest a higher grade.

It has also been common for folk to go back afterwards for a staged pic in the sun, which always made me chuckle as anybody with half a brain would wait until a route had gone into the shade before potentially putting their life on the line. I guess we all like a nice sunny/high contrast action shot though (I know I do).

What's to stop onsighters doing the same and going back to a route to get photos for publicity?

[Baron]

I love the E grade.

Remember, that's E for effort or E for extermination (or E for experience). To me it always seemed nonsense to only use this grade with the proviso 'on-sight' anyway.

[Jim]

You lot need to start another thread.
Its kinda sad that a thread about the worlds hardest trad route turns into a grading debate especially when most of us know or are mates with James.
Well done yoof, keep cranking

[Johnny Brown]

I agree with Jim, discussion of this should be seperate. What a day to be offline though - good thread, lots of good points made already.

I've never understood why E grades are supposed to be for the onsight only. Everyone who needs to understands that at the very top end pre-practice is usual. That an onsight ascent is superior stands for an E1 as much as it does E10. If you understand it, and can use your eyes, the E grade system lets you know what to expect.

Much as I agree with Adam W's broad sentiment, I think the grading idea is a non-starter. For even more confusion check out Gresham's grading riposte in the latest Climber... I'm not convinced french sport grades are a particularly useful tool for describing Uk rock anyway. Euro sport is nothing like uk trad, I've seen enough 8c-cruising frenchmen baffled by grit 6b to know that.

people with egos will always find a cock to wave, we shouldn't rise to it by giving them another grade scale to abuse.

Amen. Even if Adam's scheme was implemented, nothing would change. The next hard route would get the next sport grade up, and bulled as more dangerous than the last. Then its naive at best to think we wouldn't get 'although he doesn't believe the route could ever be onsighted, he proposes such an effort would warrant a grade of at least E14'. Guess which three word snippet would be pasted onto the accompanying photo? Fuck all achieved then.

The basis of this beef with headpointing seems to be a lack of recognition for onsights which might be worthy achievements. This then leads to a cycle of publicity equalling popularity, onsighting becoming left behind whilst rehearsed ascents become the norm.

This was never my beef. Headpointing simply felt like cheating. I wanted to climb from the bottom to the top, not fuck around first checking if I'd be able to. I'd find that out soon enough from the ground.

The publicity problem has little to do with mags, websites or photographs. They can only work with what they get. It stems from personality, from the decision to prioritise the experience over the end reward in one's life. The experience cannot be enlarged after the event, it remains a private, treasured memory. If you recognise that as what is valuable about the process, the grade fades away and with it any desire to seek glory.

[cofe]

Most people don't doubt the grade as you only have to look at what he's done and how hard he boulders.

grading discussion aside, tom's comment above pretty much sums it up for me.

[Moo]

...Rich Simpsons weirdly secretive 'hidden flashes'...

The board's called, Shooting the Shit, grimer, not Stirring the Shit.

Who let the BMC in here anyway? Shouldn't Grimreaper be writing guidebuks or sumfink rather than loitering around the interweb.

[miso soup]

...Rich Simpsons weirdly secretive 'hidden flashes'...

what's this?

Don't start 

i DID search.  I've searched again at length and found something about some unconfirmed flash reports that I wasn't previously aware of, 'weirdly secretive hidden flashes' made it sound more interesting than that, but nevermind....

[dave]

Worldwide sport climbing seems to have taken its time to move from 9a to 9b in the 17 years from 1991 to 2008 while on the surface E grades 'seem' to be accelerating ever upwards. 

9b was done in, what was it, 1995? E10 only happened relatively recently, and E11-12 on very recently, which also happened to coincide with highly tallented and devoted climbers like macleod and pearson making good on hard shit. james has flashed three 8bs for fucks sake. its not hard to see why standards have gone up.

[nik at work]

Dave you're hitting the bullseye with every shot today. Nice.

[Moo]

Dave you're hitting the bullseye with every shot today. Nice.

Somebody needs to wipe the cum off their face.

E9 - climbed in 1986

16 years later

E10 - Equilib - 2000

6 years later

E11 - 2006

2 years later

E12 - 2008

9a - 1991

4 years later

9b 1995 Akira ...  boulder problem alert ......  maybe 2008 is more realistic with shaggy boy Karma's Jumbo Love

9a+ -- 1998 .....  Orujo   ..

Great Shark Hunt dowgraded to 8A by Desroy and Landman from 8B

[Kingy]

Great Shark Hunt dowgraded to 8A by Desroy and Landman from 8B

...and Schule des Lebens downgraded from 8b to 8a by Landman

[Jim]

You lot need to start another thread.
Its kinda sad that a thread about the worlds hardest trad route turns into a grading debate especially when most of us know or are mates with James.
Well done yoof, keep cranking

[Fiend]

Is there an Echo in here and I don't mean Echo Wall (also possibly the world's hardest trad route)??

Yes Jim, here you go: http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,10112.0.html

There's the topic for them lot to use. Let's see if everyone uses it.

[Idol eyes]

I propose a new grade system, that utilises,? marks and ! marks.
long tall sally would be... !
were as the vice would be...?
obviously E 1's
Dyers route would be ????????????
obviously E12
right wall would be !!!!!
E 5
(?)= to be confirmed.
(!)= confirmed.
Make sense?
obviously not a route... but an enquiry!

[Jim]

Nice one Fiend