[Dolly]

Anyone know when its due out ?

[cofe]

summertime-ish i think? grimer's away this week. i'm sure he'll reply once he's back innit.

[Offwidth]

Just before Summer I hope!

[Paul B]

Used it for a recent tour of the Gardoms. First time I've used the new BMC format, loved it.

[grimer]

Thanks Paul 

There's a firm possibilty of a definite maybe that the guide's out in 5 week's time.

[fatdoc]

more V grades.

great.
 

[Ru]

more V grades.
great.
 

2nd edn of the bouldering guide is on its way...

[grimer]

more V grades.

great.
 

you rude shit

[fatdoc]

look mate.

no direct offence intended.

as has been said on the www. by you in the past.. the grades in your BMC guides were decided by a flip of a coin /  pint in the pub.

and I fundamentally disagree.

grit is a weather worn sedimentary rock.. like what font is...

and like sooo few of us go to heuco.. and we near all get  to go got font.

your glib responses to " why didnt you use the font system" last time round havnt been forgotten..

I know I speak for many.. not just on the niche of  UKB.


we WANT font grades for the peak guides.. and the BMC ( thankfully) are still THE defiinative guides.

yet, you let us down..

I stand by the
 

[grimer]

I have given other reasons too, mainly the confusion between the many versions of, say 6a, especially in a guide that uses the British technical grades.

While doing Stanage I did ask one very active member of this forum whether he thought we should switch to Font grades, and he said no, not since the series had been started in V grades, it would be a bad idea to change.

No offence meant? You what 'mate'? And using the wanker icon? I think that's well fucking rude.

[Sloper]

I'd prefer the use of Font grades too, and I think that V grades are a bit wank, unlike the likely product which is likely to be, if it's a patch on the others, superb.

Now back to the slagging and if there's going to be a real fight can I join in too?

[account_inactive]

One set of numbers and letters is as arbitrary as the next

Good effort on the guide Grimer, look forward to seeing it

[nik at work]

My preference is also for Font grades, having said that I understand completely the 6A/6a confusion rationale.
Also I tend to agree with Dylan. I can, with the aid of a handy conversion table, convert between the two quite easily.

I'd certainly far rather a great guide with V grades than a rubbish guide with Font grades.

[fatdoc]

Look.

That icon is in  use on this forum on a near daily basis to depict a strong opinion without resorting to depravity.
as we all know..

I stand by a strong sense of frustration that some of the best guides made to any area in europe are using a grade system that near none of us aspire to abroad.

let me ask...

what are the justifications... apart from someone not understanding 6a..??... er.. what??

c'mon.

it's no harder than french route and bouldering grading...

what' the REAL reason..?

is just that fateful night in the pub?? ( you did poise this as the reasoning back in the day for the guide a few years ago...)

or is there not one??

I'm not meaning to piss you off...

but there seems a bit of * the BMC decided on a whim to use a system to grade the boulders in the peak for at least a decade with inadequate representation from the climbing populace - IMO -, and many others...*

now I do see the line of argument that the font system is a little vague under, say 5+... but, it's soo useful from 6 ish on.. and we all have experience of it anyways.. that It seems obviated.

again..

these guides are incredible.. brilliant.. in keeping with the guides of times past.. made by driven individuals.. and are ace..

but why, oh why not the grade system of the rest of europe??

[hairich]

its easy to avoid confusion.only climb v10 and you know your on a 7c+.simples

[Duma]

Bottom end of v10 is hard 7C. V grades are bigger than font, see?

[hairich]

didn't realise the bleausards had introduced a new grade of hard 7c

[Johnny Brown]

Fatdoc, I think you're getting a bit carried away. The decision was made for solid reasons, I wasn't in total support but the logic was clear, and it wasn't made in a pub between three people. These are not aimed solely at boulderers and ultimately having two identical-but-different grading scales in one book would be confusing. Fashion has gone the other way since, and if the choice was made again maybe it would be different. But I stand by the original decision and the choice to make the series consistent.

Calling Grimer a wanker might be fair if making that call had been his only contribution. In light of what he has contributed it makes you look a twat frankly.

[Paul B]

I have to admit my post was referring to the maps, layout, topo's etc. not the grades. I don't really have a clue how to use V grades, my brain just doesn't work in them. If I really need to look I end up digging out a conversion table. For me font works best on grit.

If the decision has been made to stick with V's then fair enough BUT if that then means that the V grades spread when the BMC look further afield I think it'd be worth re-adressing the issue sooner rather than later. Unless of course your next project is the definitve guide to Hueco tanks.

To say that one set of numbers is as arbitary as the rest is true in some repsect but the V grade does appear to offer better seperation at the bottom end where as Font allows better seperation in the interesting section. Neither do their jobs perfectly.

To end on a positive note, the sample pages look great. Easy to use, clear maps with good problem descriptions (a few that made me chuckle), I'm psyched for the guide when it comes out regardless of the scale used.

(surely the wank symbol was used to suggest the v-grades were wank, not that G is a wanker, personal attacks on this forum are rare arent they?)

[Sloper]

Now then you bunch of bruised knuckle, donkey fisting felchers, for what it's worth I don't take Fatdoc's use of the  sign was intended to be an insult, if it was then it's the effort of a slack wristed fuck monkey.

Anyway, having given a brief taster to the 'the sociology of swearing like a real man' course I'm piloting at the university of Neasden we'll get back to the point at issue.

V0 can equate to anything up to font 4+ and V2 up to font 6a; as such at the lower end of the spectrum it lacks sensitivity and specificty; further as the obese medic points out more people have climbed at Font than at Hueco and consequently will have more familarity with the Font system and understand its subtlety.

But as Nik says I'd rather have Grimer's guide with the old John Gill grading system than a Cockfax font based guide giving Strawberries at Curbar 4, which of course it is.

[slackline]

Does the guide have a conversion table? (I'm still using my old guides as I'm a cheapskate!)

To say that one set of numbers is as arbitary as the rest is true in some repsect but the V grade does appear to offer better seperation at the bottom end where as Font allows better seperation in the interesting section. Neither do their jobs perfectly.

The interesting point depends where on the grade scale(s) you are currently climbing (I say from near the bottom of both  )

(surely the wank symbol was used to suggest the v-grades were wank, not that G is a wanker, personal attacks on this forum are rare arent they?)

 :agree:Thats how I read it.

[Paul B]

the sensitivity of the grading scale used should be the best one for the 'average' buyer. Whoever that may be.

[Sloper]

Slackers you of all people should realise that there's no conversion between font and v grades 

and no you're enjoying it aren't you?

 

[Ru]

It would be very confusing for most climbers to have trad grades with uk tech grades next to font grades that use the same nomenclature but mean something totally different.

[Paul B]

It would be very confusing for most climbers to have trad grades with uk tech grades next to font grades that use the same nomenclature but mean something totally different.

But bouldering grades that don't mean a lot to the boulderers are more sensible?