[Ru]

We're only passing time until we die. It's not a big deal.

This is now my favourite climbing quote.

[tallsop]

He's saying that if you can reach the good hold on top from standing in the break it's 7A. Probably about right.

I see, so its just yet another case of 'Toxic Dwarf Syndrome' then.....nevermind.....

[fatdoc]

hardly.. more of a blindingly obviously heightist eliminate.. nothing toxic in that..

I'm still trying it, once in a while.

[tallsop]

I refuse to dignify that with a toxically lanky response, especially as is would go straight over your head.

[fatdoc]

 
 

on grounds of attempted personal insult.

 

[Pitcairn]

 

on grounds of attempted personal insult.

 

I think it was warranted.    You didnt need to demean the tall climbers achievements by downgrading the problem to 7a but you did.  Short climbers have an advantage on all non-obviously-reachy problems because they are lighter and have less leverage...

 

[Jaspersharpe]

Strangely, I'm on the shortarse dwarf little person's side here. This problem is easier for the tall, fair enough. But if you are tall enough to miss out the crux by going straight for the good hold on the top then it probably is about 7A.

[abarro81]

Really? So does that mean you're saying with the normal lanky-ish way it's 7a-ish to get your RH to the slopey bit at the top and 7c to do the next move  to the good bit up and left or have I misunderstood? I've only had a brief dabble, but to get to the slopey bit didn't feel the same difficulty as trackside, GW etc, nor a grade easier than early doors, nor 3-4 grades easier than flatworld... just to think of a few problems in the area. (I'm 6ft 2and have no idea if I can reach straight to the top or not as I didn't get to the slopey bit)

[Jaspersharpe]

The thing is, reaching for the slopey bit has to be done in complete control (for me anyway) as otherwise you can't hold the fucker.

If you were going for a jug where the slopey bit is (or equally were tall enough to go straight for where the jug actually is) then you could lay one on which would be piss and would mean I would have done the problem in about five goes instead of not having done it in loads and loads of goes! Ergo 7A.

What I'm saying is that it's not just going from slopey bit to the jug that's 7C but getting the slopey bit in control, moving your feet and then getting the jug that make it 7C. Missing all this out is a different problem. To me anyway.

[tallsop]

Have you done it going straight for the jug?

[Jaspersharpe]

I thought I'd made it clear that I can't fucking reach it like that! 

I'm 6ft by the way.

[Sloper]

I see, so its just yet another case of 'Toxic Dwarf Syndrome' then.....nevermind.....

Do you mind if I steal that for my next new problem / route?

[rodma]

 

on grounds of attempted personal insult.

 

Short climbers have an advantage on all non-obviously-reachy problems because they are lighter and have less leverage...

 

Your the lank with less leverage, us dwarves have more leverage 

[tallsop]

Haha! Feel free, i heard it somewhere before.

Js - I always find it hard to understand when people are so sure of the grade of a method without actually having done it themselves, just doesnt make sense.
Im not saying it would be harder than 7c, that would be daft, could even be font 6b for all i know!

Doesnt really matter though does it -
 
We're only passing time until we die. It's not a big deal.

I dont know what fatdwarfdoc is gettin so wound up for.....

[Jaspersharpe]

Reread my explanation.

If you were going for a jug where the slopey bit is (or equally were tall enough to go straight for where the jug actually is) then you could lay one on which would be piss and would mean I would have done the problem in about five goes instead of not having done it in loads and loads of goes! Ergo 7A.

In about 5 goes I was hitting the slopey top comfortably but not in enough control to hold it. If it had been as good as the good bit on the top I would have been able to hold it easily. Simples.

 

[Pitcairn]

 

on grounds of attempted personal insult.

 

Short climbers have an advantage on all non-obviously-reachy problems because they are lighter and have less leverage...

 

Your the lank with less leverage, us dwarves have more leverage 

Your right.  I said more when I meant less.  Bad bad bad! 

Bah, go back to cranking one armers Roddy, you pedantic dwarf...   

[fatdoc]

Haha! Feel free, i heard it somewhere before.

Js - I always find it hard to understand when people are so sure of the grade of a method without actually having done it themselves, just doesnt make sense.
Im not saying it would be harder than 7c, that would be daft, could even be font 6b for all i know!

Doesnt really matter though does it -
 
We're only passing time until we die. It's not a big deal.

I dont know what fatdwarfdoc is gettin so wound up for.....

trust me.. I am totally not wound up

Nice antagonistic start the forum dude.

lets
 

Jasper iterates my non wound up point of view well, the post was *how is it done* seems its well answered now.

abarro.. you'll love this, you are the right shape and can stick stuff under tension.. get it done mate

[rodma]

 

on grounds of attempted personal insult.

 

Short climbers have an advantage on all non-obviously-reachy problems because they are lighter and have less leverage...

 

Your the lank with less leverage, us dwarves have more leverage 

Your right.  I said more when I meant less.  Bad bad bad! 

Bah, go back to cranking one armers Roddy, you pedantic dwarf...   

I know this is seriously  but, how many years ago was it that you helped me place gear on lead, when I took my first fall?

For some reason I remembered that incident just the other day. 

[GCW]

If you were going for a jug where the slopey bit is (or equally were tall enough to go straight for where the jug actually is) then you could lay one on which would be piss and would mean I would have done the problem in about five goes instead of not having done it in loads and loads of goes! Ergo 7A.

Surely this means that this is the easiest sequence, ergo the problem is 7a, and if you're short it's a bit harder?  Get your 7c Tippex out shorties

[dave]

To be fair for real thalidome stumpies they can get the top in total control by rocking onto the starting workhard sloper. I recon its hardest for gents around the 6' 0.5" mark.

[andy_e]

Balls!

[Jaspersharpe]

I concur.

[Pitcairn]

 

on grounds of attempted personal insult.

 

Short climbers have an advantage on all non-obviously-reachy problems because they are lighter and have less leverage...

 

Your the lank with less leverage, us dwarves have more leverage 

Your right.  I said more when I meant less.  Bad bad bad! 

Bah, go back to cranking one armers Roddy, you pedantic dwarf...   

I know this is seriously  but, how many years ago was it that you helped me place gear on lead, when I took my first fall?

For some reason I remembered that incident just the other day. 

I think it was 1990 or 1991 

That makes me feel seriously old...

Will be back in edinburgh at christmas - might see you at A2.

[Norton Sharley]

And I don't know where Pitcairn gets the idea that short climbers weigh less, has he ever met me or the Fatdoc?  Clearly not.

And as for short arms = short levers how is this really supposed to work? 

For example, if we take the simple case of a one arm lock off with the arm at a ninety degree angle, the load on the shoulder, which is the reaction force that the body must exert to lock off the arm and therefore the 'strength' that must be applied, is the force at the arm (weight of the climber) multiplied by the distance, the length of the upper arm.  The 'strength applied' is force x distance.  This means that for a lock off to be equally easy or hard, i.e. equal strength applied,  for two different sized climbers means that the ratio of their mass to forarm length must be the same.  This means that a fat short climber, say Fatdoc for example, may have to apply more strength to lock off than a lanky twat (s'cuse me) like Jasper, for example, because I would guess that the ratio of Fatdoc's to Jasper's weight is greater than the ratio of Fatdoc's to Jasper's upper arm lengths.  Simply put, it ain't just about having short levers.

Now if both Fatdoc and Jasper would kindly provide details of their weight and upper arm length we can test this example.

This is a simplistic example in which the necessary counter rotational moment has been ignored and I have assumed that the gravitational fields in which Fatdoc and Jasper exist are equal.  Quite clearly neither of these assumptions are likely to hold true especially given the rarified atmosphere in which Fatdoc lives.

Perhaps then we can create some kind of corralitive diagram, along the lines of a Moody Diagram, demonstrating the relative difficulties for short fat bastards and tall lanky twats.  Presumably Ben Moon would be the epicentre.  This may also help resolve UKC and 8a.nu's grading difficulties.

[dave]

And I don't know where Pitcairn gets the idea that short climbers weigh less, has he ever met me or the Fatdoc?  Clearly not.

fat short climbers do weight less than fat tall climbers though! you've got to compare apples with apples.