[Fiend]

In the spirit of fun.

E9...
+1 natural variance in grades / difference between nu-route and 2nd ascent
+1 difference of trust in ballnuts / less gear
+1 likely to be proportionally harder onsight / overestimation of French grade / whatever you like
= E12

[Drew]

I think I can recall seeing (on video of course) Chris Sharma saying that if he had to grade the Mandala he'd give it V16, now then given that this has settled at what V11? who'd going to be the first to weigh in and say the things about Sharma that are being said about James.

I seem to recall that it was said with his tongue firmly in his cheek.

Warning - while you were reading 4 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post

Bugger me! You guys type fast

[Doylo]

I think I can recall seeing (on video of course) Chris Sharma saying that if he had to grade the Mandala he'd give it V16, now then given that this has settled at what V11? who'd going to be the first to weigh in and say the things about Sharma that are being said about James.

I seem to recall that it was said with his tongue firmly in his cheek.

Warning - while you were reading 4 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post

Bugger me! You guys type fast

Yeah the sharma things bollocks. He was taking the piss.

[SA Chris]

Am I the only one who thinks the concept of the line (no, not Julian) has become completely confused nowadays?

To get back to (my) dictionary definition corner for a moment, Cenotaph Corner is a line - as is Master's Edge.  The Devil's Tower is covered in lines.

I think Lord of the Flies is a much better route than Cenotaph Corner - actually I'm lying, because I haven't done the Corner - but it isn't a line.  It's a gap on a wall.

Icon of Lust is one of the most stupendous routes I have ever seen.  A truly gobsmacking climb, linking occasional half-features in a huge blank face.  And the location is the finest I've climbed on in the British mountains, with probably a 6 hour wait for help the penalty for a false move.

But lets face it, the hardest and one of the finest British slabs it may be, but it isn't actually a line!

And neither is the first section of Walk of Life - that's a face too, and a mighty impressive one at that, but it only really becomes a line when it joins the thin crack on Dyer Straits....

Anyone else with me on this?

Is this important at this point?

[SA Chris]

btw, who/what/where is Icon of Lust? I must have missed the boat on that one completely and a cursory search turned up nowt.

Excerpts SMC Cairngorms - Loch Avon Basin - Shelterstone
Icon of Lust 115m E8 ***

FA 2003 June 24 J Line P Thorburn

Pitch 1 by J Lines L Hughes onsight 24 Jun 2001

A monumental voyage up the full height of the central slabs taking a direct line through realm of the Senses and L'elisir d' Amore

1 35m 6a a serious pitch......
2 25m 6c a brilliant pitch, desperate and bold.....
3 55m 6b Extremely bold a cool head required.....

[Neil F]

Is this important at this point?

No, of course it isn't Chris.

But the reference to Icon of Lust as a "jaw dropping line" when it actually isn't a line at all, did strike me as a bit strange.

Mind you, if you'd rather debate grades and crumbling reputations....

Neil

[Sloper]

I think I can recall seeing (on video of course) Chris Sharma saying that if he had to grade the Mandala he'd give it V16, now then given that this has settled at what V11? who'd going to be the first to weigh in and say the things about Sharma that are being said about James.

I seem to recall that it was said with his tongue firmly in his cheek.

Warning - while you were reading 4 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post

Bugger me! You guys type fast

Yeah the sharma things bollocks. He was taking the piss.

Really?  Bugger if I hadn't had the subtitles turned off I would have realised.

Regardless it's quite common for the grade of a FA to be down graded without the first ascensionist, in effect being accused of being a liar, I wonder what makes James so different?

[GCW]

Am I the only one who thinks the concept of the line (no, not Julian) has become completely confused nowadays?

I would say there's a difference between a line and a feature.  Cenotaph corner is a feature and a line whereas Indian Face is more a line.   

[Sloper]

Indeed the bags under my eyes are a feature, the lines are to be found on my forehead.

Incidentally can I juest say Mick Ryan is seeking to hold back the tide with a typo.

[Drew]

...
Regardless it's quite common for the grade of a FA to be down graded without the first ascensionist, in effect being accused of being a liar, I wonder what makes James so different?

The trouble is that the downgrading of the Promise was ridiculously high profile, The Groove was repeated with relative ease, and WoL was graded astronomically high that it was extremely well publicised. The Promise was high profile because the Yanks were ripping everything to shreds. The Groove wasn't even repeated properly (am I allowed to tick every route in the Peak which I can't physically climb? That would mean I can finish all my lists!), and WoL was extremely hyped because of the astronomical grade Keenus gave it. Let's not forget that forging new ground is a million times harder than repeating it. I know it gets mentioned a lot, but Brad Pitt was 8a+/8b(?) originally. It's now often considered 7c!

I don't think James is specifically overgrading routes, but I personally would like to see him repeating a few more hard routes which have had their grades settle (If Six Was Nine springs to mind). I haven't heard about him repeating anything recently (specifically routes).

Anyway, that's just my 2p's worth. I don't climb hard enough to really be able to form an opinion properly. And I don't think it's very nice to start defaming James' name just because of a few routes. He's getting out and doing stuff I can't even comprehend!

[Jaspersharpe]

I haven't heard about him repeating anything recently (specifically routes).

Onsighting End Of The Affair was the last thing I heard about. Not too shabby. 

[Johnny Brown]

Neil, I agree. There you go. Haven't seen either of the routes in question in the flesh, so can't comment on whether whatever 'line' they follow would make my jaw drop. I do know there aren't any lines on Raven tor though.  

I don't think anyone is 'defaming' James as a climber, more the publicity resulting from claiming the hardest route in the uk, ever. That has backfired badly, though may not have been entirely his wish or making, who knows. I'm sure he is currently understanding why so many high profile climbers go through a stage of not grading their stuff other than to offer a 'hardest I've done yet'. Let the chattering classes decide...

[SA Chris]

Is this important at this point?

No, of course it isn't Chris.

But the reference to Icon of Lust as a "jaw dropping line" when it actually isn't a line at all, did strike me as a bit strange.

Mind you, if you'd rather debate grades and crumbling reputations....

OK, if we want to draw away from the main topic, here we go. IMO Any climb follows a line, be it a distinct feature, a vague ripple, a line of holds, a series of dinks up a blank slab, a collection of dots and hyphens or just climing absolute blankness. Look in any guidebook and the diagrams are covered in lines, even if there is nothing on the rock itself that distinguishes the climb form the rock.

[dobbin]

Brad Pitt was 8a+/8b(?) originally. It's now often considered 7c!

Bad example - a new sequence was found and its now climbed a totally different way.

I do know there aren't any lines on Raven tor though.  

What about Mecca? thats a brilliant line.

[Jaspersharpe]

And the line of the crag peak, Powerband! 

[dave]

putp - LINE!
revelations - LINE!
weedkiller traverse - LINE!
oomt - LINE!
(L1, R1) L3, R12, L14, R14  - LINE!

I could go on.

[dobbin]

Yeah, stop Tor bashing Adam, perhaps we just need to foster your talent and nuture your relationship so that you too can enjoy the summer.

[Sloper]

Brad Pitt was 8a+/8b(?) originally. It's now often considered 7c!

Bad example - a new sequence was found and its now climbed a totally different way.

Actually I think that's a perfect example, a new sequence, finding a new hold all radically change the grade but don't invalidate the 'correctness' of the initial proposition.

[moose]

Not sure whether Sharma was being entirely tongue in cheek re the Mandala.  At the time didn't he feel that it was the hardest thing he had ever done?  From what I recall one of the repeat ascentionists (David Graham?) used a photographer's step-ladder and found a decent hold that was invisible from below and enabled a different sequence to be used to Sharma's rather heinous original one (which, whilst not V16, may have been a damn sight harder than its current grade).

I must admit that, after the whole The Promise and The Groove affairs, I had regarded The Walk of Life's grading with something like foreboding.  If only because of the vast amount of fuck-witted armchair pontificating that I knew would pour in ukc. 

Now, what I do at the crag with can barely be called climbing, only in the same way that music is "organised sound", but even I know that judging the difficulty of a climb is a horrendously inexact art (there are f6c's that I will never do and f7b+'s that I have done).  A climber's internal grading scale depends utterly on their personal experience of the various accepted benchmarks.  And, given the vagueries of day-to-day performance and the disparities between a climber's strengths and weaknesses, any pretence of an objective assessment is ludicrous.  Thus, criticising a first ascentionist, who seemed to genuinely go to the brink during his efforts, for a difference in grading from the repeat ascentionist seems sililarly misguided.  Doesn't it occur to the more strident voices on ukc that, if James was a genuinely mendacious character and a gifted actor, there would be easier and less lethal ways for him to make a living?  Nearly dieing and emotionally torturing both himself and his girlfriend seems a high price to pay for some 5.10's and a cover photo. 

Frankly, from my position as yet another fuck-witted armchair critic (it's a tough job... ), it seems that this affair may partly result from how easy James found Equilibrium, a route lest we forget that neither Team USA or Dave McCleod could manage.  Unsurprisingly given his bouldering gifts, James found that brief sequence of powerful moves above a big cam (admittedly with a ground scraping fall) less taxing than a prolonged, mentally intense battle with a long slab. So, unless he wanted to retrospectively downgrade every Peak test-piece from Equilibrium downwards, he had no choice based upon his experience of The Walk of Life but to give it the grade he did.  Would the climbing public prefer it if he had lied or made a lame attempt to second guess the likely preferences of any second ascentionists?

[north_country_boy]

I agreed with two 3rd's of your post.....however the last point i'm afraid seems flawed.....

Surely routes which suit your style will feel 'easier' than routes which do not, hence you will always subconsiously treat these routes as more difficult.

I.e. compare a short bouldery 8a+ (PUTP / Caviar) with say a long 8a+ (Supercool/Urgent Action), very diferent routes, same french grade........experience of each route very different, experience of climbers very different depending on their preference to short or long routes/bouldery or endurance style.

Are they any less 8a+ than each other?

No. They are just too routes of the same grade on a specturm of style.

I believe the overiding factor is that James hasn't climbed enough simliar routes too WOL to 'accurately' grade it with a trad or sport grade and so is comparing it to other routes based on purely his 'experience', conciously or subconsciously.

Therefore its inevitable that the 2nd ascentionist with his vast experience of similar routes is going to offer a more 'accurate' grade of the difficulty, after all his experience will have been different to James being a repeat and all, knowing James had taken a big fall/placed more gear.

Just because something isn't your style and you found it hard, doesn't mean you take an inflated grade for it....???!!!!

[dave]

Therefore its inevitable that the 2nd ascentionist with his vast experience of similar routes is going to offer a more 'accurate' grade of the difficulty, after all his experience will have been different to James being a repeat and all, knowing James had taken a big fall/placed more gear.

Thing is, is DMC immune to the downgrading whiplash phenomonon that afflicts virstually everyone else? when something it suspected or perceived to be overgraded, when the first repeat comes it often tends to go too far the other direction.

For example, Carmen Picasso given E9 initially, when it first got repeated it was suggested it was only E7, yet ended up these days being E8. happens a lot with boulder problems too, see loads of examples around.

So what i'm saying is the fact that it was originally E12 a contibuter to the big downgrade? If james had given it E10, would DMC even have downgraded it at all, or would he have said "thats ballpark, close enough for jazz" and moved on?

[Will Hunt]

I'm interested in this line debate.

In my opinion there are lines and there are Lines and I think the two are being confused. To me a Line is a feature on the rock, be it a scoop, rib, arete, corner, crack etc etc, that instantly catches the climbers eye and begs to be climbed. You all know the feeling when you walk up to a crag for the first time and spot a feature on the walk in which begs to be climbed.
I suppose things like The Master's Edge, Cenotaph Corner, The Groove, Archangel and the other Stanage aretes in that area are the best example of lines that I can think of. To be less corner/arete-centric I suppose other awesome lines would be South Ridge Direct on Cir Mhor, especially the S-Crack and Y-Crack pitches. You can see those bad boys from halfway down the fucking valley and I knew we were going to climb them before we even got to the crag and flipped open the guidebook.

Then there are lines in a guidebook showing where all the different routes go.

The difference being is that Lines are those prominent features which attract your attention and you'll risk your neck to get up (for me the epitome of this was Archangel) and lines are just, well, lines on the topo.

Because of the nature of blank slabs I think its hard to see the Lines there because there are no obvious features that stand out. I suppose the Line factor comes in when it's particularly blank and there's only really one line of holds which will get you up there.

This is what makes the difference between Moffatt's "Master's Wall" and Dawes' "Indian Face". Jerry broke away from the Line when it became too tough. Johnny finished the job and stuck to the Line (not a dig at JM).


The line of Yorkshire (for me) - High Noon! Look at the fucker! It's crazy!
This is why I find it hard to get overly inspired on the Catwalk. There just don't seem to be that many Lines there that are as impressive as those found on grit. Shit I'm going to get eaten alive for that comment.

[Sloper]

I'm not having a go or making a personal attack but I think your reference to different styles of sports routes viz a viz grades is an error that sits at the heart of this debate, a sport route is just that; different trad routes get a different grade because of their differences eg E5 5c could be a bold slab or a 90 degree overhang covered in jugs.

The degree of experience of climbing similar routes to one which one is proposing a grade for is certainly something that will have an affect on how accurately one grades, BUT (and here's the bit that I don't want to be taken as a personal attack) when you climb something that ins't your style and something that you find hard you shouldn't take an inflated grade but if you're the first ascensionsit you have to give the route the grade that you felt was appropriate.

For example, I did a problem at the Roaches 'a modest proposal' on a warm day with showers of drizzle and thought V4/5 was appropriate, this is now in the bouldering guide at Font 7a (so V6/7?) I was at least a grade out as I didn't think I was climbing well when I did it and conditions were crap.  If I do my project and feel that it's E5 then I'll give it E5 and if it gets repeated and down graded or upgraded so be it, but no one will be able to tell me that it didn't feel E5 when I did it.

The E grade includes a number of elements and one of those is a subjective mental assessment of how it feels, given this there's bound to be variation and these variations should not be taken as anything other than natural.  We have so far wantonly insufficient evidence to say that James is absolutely wrong and that the grades are outside the expected range of variation.

I know the promise has had a large number of ascents but consider this, 'team america' purportedly said that the promise was a grade harder than end of the affair so a downgrade from E10 to E9 seems to be nothing to shout about, particularly when the use of mats and bounce testing the gear is concerned. As for the 'welsh, ground up crew' being the cynic I might suggest that the downgrading could be seen as having an agenda behind it, particularly when the use of the ladder and numerous pads was concerned.

It is a great shame that the debate is skewed by a small number of people saying James is taking the piss, deliberately over grading due to a huge ego and to make money rather than saying, wow the boy's been busy and climbed some great lines and you know what, so what if he makes the odd mistake with the grade.
 
The actions of Mick Ryan, Alan James et al just strike me as extreme double standards with a nasty whiff of jealousy and hypocricy.

[SA Chris]

For example, I did a problem at the Roaches 'a modest proposal' on a warm day with showers of drizzle and thought V4/5 was appropriate, this is now in the bouldering guide at Font 7a (so V6/7?) I was at least a grade out as I didn't think I was climbing well when I did it and conditions were crap.  

Yor undergrading was due to the superb spotting and beta giving abilities of your spotting team. No-one who has done it since has had such a great advantage.

[dave]

some sense talked there by slope (...a refreshing change.....).

Will, i think you're just using "line" as a synonym for "feature", which is fine, but seems to defeat the point of having a new word for it. I find a complete lack of feature a line too - take that big flat wall project at lawrencefield, this is line of the century, featureless. hence why WOL is considered a line.