Author Topic: lakes bouldering rockfax (Read 15049 times)

tc · « **on:** June 02, 2006, 01:31:23 pm »

It seems as if I am not alone in my views on the new Rockfax bouldering guide to the Lakes:

"Lakes Bouldering by Jonathan Lagoe and Andy Hyslop is now available. The new book covers the varied and extensive bouldering found in and around the Lake District and includes all the classic old venues plus many which have never before been published in a guidebook. The guide, which is well put together with full colour reproduction, has had a mixed reception from many local enthusiasts; "often vague and lackluster descriptions - and its poor collection of fairly uninspiring imagery" and "The Lakes bouldering scene was really buzzing for a while but the guide singularly fails to capture that spirit." "It has jpegs but it has no soul."
Reported 2nd June 2006 at www.climbonline.co.uk

andi_e · « **Reply #1 on:** June 02, 2006, 04:45:04 pm »

Better watch your back tc, i got shot down severly for saying something like that... only I did it on UKC, you're probably safe here.

I agree with you entirely. How can anything as sanitised as the Rockfax format portray an area's spirit?

There's a topic knocking around somewhere to do with this.

tc · « **Reply #2 on:** June 12, 2006, 06:40:16 pm »

Quote from: tc on June 02, 2006, 01:31:23 pm

"Lakes Bouldering by Jonathan Lagoe and Andy Hyslop is now available. The new book covers the varied and extensive bouldering found in and around the Lake District and includes all the classic old venues plus many which have never before been published in a guidebook. The guide, which is well put together with full colour reproduction, has had a mixed reception from many local enthusiasts; "often vague and lackluster descriptions - and its poor collection of fairly uninspiring imagery" and "The Lakes bouldering scene was really buzzing for a while but the guide singularly fails to capture that spirit." "It has jpegs but it has no soul."
Reported 2nd June 2006 at www.climbonline.co.uk

Oddly enough, the above review has now been altered to:
"Lakes Bouldering by Jonathan Lagoe and Andy Hyslop is now available. The new book covers over 1000 problems in and around the Lake District and includes all the classic old venues plus many which have never before been published in a guidebook. Areas Included: Kentmere, Chapel Stile Boulders, Langdale Boulders, Wrynose, Coniston, Gouther, Carrock Fell, Thirlmere Boulders, Ullswater, The Bowderstone, Langstrath Boulders, Honister, Gillercombe Boulders, St Bees North Head, Fleswick Bay, St Bees South Head, Wasdale, Eskdale Fisherground, Upper Eskdale, Furness Area. The links take you to the relevant sections of the Rockfax Route Database. Reported 2nd June 2006"

How very strange $:-\$

Fiend · « **Reply #3 on:** June 12, 2006, 10:28:38 pm »

Maybe because they remembered that they're a news site and not an opinion site. I'd prefer them to keep the politics out of it.

SA Chris · « **Reply #4 on:** June 13, 2006, 06:40:37 am »

So they aren't allowed to report anyone's opinion about anything, just beacuse they are a "news" site? Balls.

Be interested to hear Steve Crowe's motives as to why they changed it though.

Mick Ryan · « **Reply #5 on:** June 14, 2006, 12:53:23 pm »

Quote from: SA Chris on June 13, 2006, 06:40:37 am

So they aren't allowed to report anyone's opinion about anything, just beacuse they are a "news" site? Balls.

Of course they are. But it usual to credit opinions with a name.

tc · « **Reply #6 on:** June 14, 2006, 01:15:28 pm »

And if, unusually, they decline to credit their sources, do you exert pressure on them to alter their review? Or does this just happen by coincidence?
It is in no way unusual to withold a reviewer's identity from the author of a work.

Mick Ryan · « **Reply #7 on:** June 14, 2006, 01:55:59 pm »

Quote from: tc on June 14, 2006, 01:15:28 pm

It is in no way unusual to withold a reviewer's identity from the author of a work.

Which planet does that happen on?

It is always usual if you review something, gear, a car, a book etc to credit the reviewer. Unless that is, you happen to post the review anonymously or under a psuedonym on a forum.

If you hold an opinion about something or someone have the backbone to sign your name to it.

Mick Ryan

tc · « **Reply #8 on:** June 14, 2006, 02:10:59 pm »

Ah, bless. It happens, for example, in the academic world. In fact, it is standard procedure on receipt of an academic paper to use double blind reviews to assess the quality of the work prior to publication in journals, etc. You will also find anonymous reviews of books, CDs, plays and films in daily papers and magazines, where opinions about the work are given but the name of the person who holds those opinions is not.
On a vaguely related note, apparently Joseph Conrad's wife saw her husband sitting despondently in his library after reading the reviews of his latest novel. 'But Joseph, they all appreciate your work,' she said. 'I don't want to be appreciated,' he replied, 'I want to be praised.'
Do you only want to be praised, Mick?

webbo · « **Reply #9 on:** June 15, 2006, 07:11:50 am »

Quote from: Mick Ryan on June 14, 2006, 01:55:59 pm

Quote from: tc on June 14, 2006, 01:15:28 pm
It is in no way unusual to withold a reviewer's identity from the author of a work.

Which planet does that happen on?

It is always usual if you review something, gear, a car, a book etc to credit the reviewer. Unless that is, you happen to post the review anonymously or under a psuedonym on a forum.

If you hold an opinion about something or someone have the backbone to sign your name to it.

Mick Ryan

i think met you/saw you at kilnsey many years ago.you came across as a bit of pratt.funnily enough my opinion has'nt changed.
yours
charlton chestwig

tc · « **Reply #10 on:** June 15, 2006, 04:54:32 pm »

You scared him off Webbo, you big bully

Mick Ryan · « **Reply #11 on:** June 15, 2006, 05:40:53 pm »

Sorry for the delay tc.....getting close to the wire on the Bishop Bouldering guide.

No, we are most certainly not scared of criticism, nor do we want only praise. Constructive criticism is welcomed and is responded to.

webbo · « **Reply #12 on:** June 16, 2006, 07:03:07 am »

however you seem to respond any criticism in a some what challenging manner by making asspertions that folk have no bottle because they post under a nickname,rather than answering the point made.

Johnny Brown · « **Reply #13 on:** June 16, 2006, 02:18:12 pm »

Quote

often vague and lackluster descriptions - and its poor collection of fairly uninspiring imagery
The Lakes bouldering scene was really buzzing for a while but the guide singularly fails to capture that spirit
It has jpegs but it has no soul

Well that all looks like fair constructive criticism to me, Mick. Would any one else expect full references for this?

Teaboy · « **Reply #14 on:** June 16, 2006, 02:21:55 pm »

this months climb has an even handed review of it.

Fiend · « **Reply #15 on:** June 16, 2006, 08:07:49 pm »

Quote from: SA Chris on June 13, 2006, 06:40:37 am

So they aren't allowed to report anyone's opinion about anything, just beacuse they are a "news" site? Balls.

Indeed, because that's not what I meant. Climbonline do a good job of being an "apolitical" news / information site - and this is clearly a political issue between Rockfax and the Lakes activists. As I said, I think they (CO) come off better if they keep out of it on their site at least.

RichardB · « **Reply #16 on:** June 19, 2006, 12:43:14 pm »

I thought the Climb review was a bit strange in that It pretty much slagged the guide of but then gave it 4 stars for occasional out of town users.

tc · « **Reply #17 on:** June 19, 2006, 08:15:12 pm »

Dear Rockfax,
to counter the negative reviews, why not offer a free copy of the guide to anyone who is prepared to write a positive review and then publish it on UKC?
Oh, you have done that already

SA Chris · « **Reply #18 on:** June 20, 2006, 06:47:58 am »

Quote from: RichardB on June 19, 2006, 12:43:14 pm

I thought the Climb review was a bit strange in that It pretty much slagged the guide of but then gave it 4 stars for occasional out of town users.

Probably because all locals prefer and use lakesbloc?

Alan James, Rockfax · « **Reply #19 on:** June 20, 2006, 10:52:44 am »

Quote from: tc on June 19, 2006, 08:15:12 pm

Dear Rockfax,
to counter the negative reviews, why not offer a free copy of the guide to anyone who is prepared to write a positive review and then publish it on UKC?
Oh, you have done that already

Actually I just offered a free copy to anyone prepared to write a review; there was no agenda and I'm sure both reviewers would be happy to confirm that I gave them no indication about what kind of review I was after.

We actually got two back and I have added the second one this morning

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=209

Alan

Stubbs · « **Reply #20 on:** June 20, 2006, 11:12:12 am »

Or here for the non UKC admin site users
http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=209

Alan James, Rockfax · « **Reply #21 on:** June 20, 2006, 11:20:46 am »

Whoops, thanks.

Edited mine now anyway (quite handy that post editing feature).

Alan

Dylan · « **Reply #22 on:** June 20, 2006, 11:23:07 am »

If I write an unbiased review for UKB can I have a free guide Alan?

Dude · « **Reply #23 on:** June 20, 2006, 11:29:25 am »

I'll do one as well Alan?

Alan James, Rockfax · « **Reply #24 on:** June 20, 2006, 11:39:39 am »

Sorry but we only really needed one, and got two anyway.

If you are interested in general reviews of other books, then email me and I'll put you onto a list of potential reviewers.

Alan