[uptown]

Hold on uptown. Having just reskimmed the thread there is only one person arguing the "don't report this stuff" corner (with a bit of half hearted backup from Fiend, but hey  ).

Are people really that afraid of an internet tongue lashing from JB that they avoid reporting on here despite the fact that basically everyone else appears to be supportive of such actions?

It takes just one man pissing on your chips to get them wet Jasper! 

[Jaspersharpe]

Nice analogy.  But it's the idea that there is a general feeling of negativity about posting on UKB amongst some people that concerns me. When you have one person expressing a negative viewpoint but ten other regular posters disagreeing I would have thought that would encourage rather than discourage. It's a bit like the Stevie Haston toy chucking incident. At the end of the day, it's just opinion and words on a screen.

[Sloper]

I think that there is an issue re credibility, ie. if we get the redtops posting shite then the 'status' of the site is diminished however this is easily countered by people ignoring things like Paul Mitchells latest magnum opus ....

My view is and always has been 'publish and be dammed' etc

[Andy B]

Sure, but if we assume that then nothing new will ever get done and apart from that they obviously haven't done everything under 7c. Also if people can't be bothered to claim first ascents then they shouldn't bother retro claiming them when people do make the effort of cleaning problems and writting them up. If it wasn't for people cleaning problems, claiming ascents and pointing people to new problems there wouldn't be guide books nor the possibilty of going out and trying something new. This is all very similar to what happened when I wrote up 'A Tricky Traverse' at Secret Garden. OK it's not the best problem but it's certainly worth doing, but the immediate response was Oh I'm sure Zaff will have done this, he's done everything at Secret Garden, he used to crawl all over that bit of rock. Well I met Zaff at Secret Garden about 6 weeks ago and we showed each other various eliminates and he confirmed that he hadn't done this problem. So all I'm saying is that it's all very well acting as a spokesman for somebody else but unless you definitively know that they have done something don't just assume that they have.

Travs (and others), don't be put off from posting your finds on here. It is appreciated. Whether it has been done before or not, at least you're making the effort to share it with everyone else.

I fully agree with all of this.

Whilst I feel that there is a place for some venues to be left unrecorded, such as Grinah Stones, I think if any problems at an area are documented then the more the merrier, and I don't want to rely on the value judgments of a few people to decide what is worthy of my attention. If I know a problem exists I can decide soon enough whether I think it's worth climbing or not, but if I don't know of it's existence I don't have a choice at all. I have done lots of brilliant problems that I would have walked straight past if I hadn't been told about them.

[Johnny Brown]

I, like Travs, invited mockery by claiming an unrecorded problem in News.

I've been looking to see who did the pissing but I can't find it, unless you mean this one?

A definitive bouldering guide is never going to happen on my shift.

You people are hard work, constantly missing the point like this.

I've no beef with the idea of a definitive guide, but I have been closely involved with enough guides to know its not realistic at all. Bouldering being much more play orientated than trad or sport, every bit of rock can have a worthwhile move. Getting these into print is a fool's errand; at some point there has to be a selection procedure.

We've all had a smirk at Gary Gibson's 'ceaseless tide of crap new routes', but somehow the bouldering equivalent is beyond reproach? Despite a far higher chance of them not even being new.

There are two sides to this; firstly publicising increasingly crap problems, and secondly claiming stuff likely done before as new.

I have no truck with this nonsense that the first claim is more important than the first climb. Either you believe in the worth of a historical record or you don't. If you discover what you've done has been done before by someone who didn't think it worth claiming then tough. If you think its worth recording then you should make that record as accurate as possible. If you find you are no longer interested in recording it then perhaps you should question your motives in the first place. Funny how losing that first ascent claim can suddenly give a man objectivity on quality...

So my suggestion is this; only if its beyond question new is it NEWS. Otherwise do us the favour of getting a photo, making a topo, and putting it in the beta forum as info to share. If it is new and classic you'll soon get the respect that's due. If its neither you won't look like a willy-waver. Then the folk who write the guides won't have to trek around to find a steaming pile of log that isn't worth including. And then bouldering consumerists like Andy B will get nice guides so they can go tick all the good problems.



And Sloper, you have an almighty cheek to call Paul Mitchell after that Stanage far right claim...

[r-man]

To me the more popular the area and the lower the grade the more claiming seems like gratuitous willy-waving.

They aare stuff that has done before that is being claimed by increasingly desperate willy-wavers

If its neither you won't look like a willy-waver.

Good grief, man! Desist!

[a dense loner]

having read this thread all the way through in one hit it looks like a lot of people aren't working or sit on the internet in the office.

sloper, travs, and r-mam all i can suggest is to get together and have a group hug.

this is how it works. if i climb 6a i have no interest in reporting a 4b problem i've just done. if i climb 7a i have no interest in reporting a 6a problem i've just done. when the grades get closer to what more people perceive as a good grade ie 7a i will start reporting. the fact that i have climbed a 6a that someone claims is new x years later doesn't change the fact that i climbed it x years before, whether i could be arsed to report it (see this paragraph for details) or not.

[Percy B]

the fact that i have climbed a 6a

Now THAT is news!

[Sloper]

I, like Travs, invited mockery by claiming an unrecorded problem in News.

I've been looking to see who did the pissing but I can't find it, unless you mean this one?

A definitive bouldering guide is never going to happen on my shift.

You people are hard work, constantly missing the point like this.

I've no beef with the idea of a definitive guide, but I have been closely involved with enough guides to know its not realistic at all. Bouldering being much more play orientated than trad or sport, every bit of rock can have a worthwhile move. Getting these into print is a fool's errand; at some point there has to be a selection procedure.

We've all had a smirk at Gary Gibson's 'ceaseless tide of crap new routes', but somehow the bouldering equivalent is beyond reproach? Despite a far higher chance of them not even being new.

There are two sides to this; firstly publicising increasingly crap problems, and secondly claiming stuff likely done before as new.

I have no truck with this nonsense that the first claim is more important than the first climb. Either you believe in the worth of a historical record or you don't. If you discover what you've done has been done before by someone who didn't think it worth claiming then tough. If you think its worth recording then you should make that record as accurate as possible. If you find you are no longer interested in recording it then perhaps you should question your motives in the first place. Funny how losing that first ascent claim can suddenly give a man objectivity on quality...

So my suggestion is this; only if its beyond question new is it NEWS. Otherwise do us the favour of getting a photo, making a topo, and putting it in the beta forum as info to share. If it is new and classic you'll soon get the respect that's due. If its neither you won't look like a willy-waver. Then the folk who write the guides won't have to trek around to find a steaming pile of log that isn't worth including. And then bouldering consumerists like Andy B will get nice guides so they can go tick all the good problems.



And Sloper, you have an almighty cheek to call Paul Mitchell after that Stanage far right claim...

If you're going to have a pop why not put it in full size text, as for having a cheek I've got four and I'm not looking for you to kiss any of them. Or is the wee thing above Toady's Wall the last great problem on grit?

As for missing the point with due respect I find your logic rather confused.  You seem to think that it's fine to report things via a topo but not in a 'news' thread; I must have missed the class which covered that distinction.

Let's take the next issue, I can't recall you taking this stance with problems that are little more than s(h)it starts to existing problems or mindless eliminates; if I'm wrong feel free to correct me.

Moving on, is there some UKAS test for quality, some assay, some formula that I've missed?

Now I report something that turns out to have been climbed before, and it's my responsibility to go back and change the original report?  Get a grip. The problems that I did, are when the scrittle subsides, quality moves, on good rock in a pleasant situation.  Have you seen me spraying the 'news' over the whole web, I thought they were new, with Bluebrad I cleaned them, I climbed them I claimed them, then J L who ever he is, said he'd done them before.  It's on the thread and there you go, do you need me to repeat what J L has said?  What would that add.

Now let's move to guides, which you suggest are the real arbiter of what shoul go in and what's a pile of poo.  How much on the face of business should go in, or what about the left and right arete eliminates on the 'ultimate gritstone experience'.

So in short, if you're going to take a position try thinking it through first.

[mark s]

there's stuff being claimed recently in the churnet that boyson and others would have done years ago.at least down there its out of the way,we came across a big bouldering roof about 5 minutes up and left behind gentlemans rock that has been cleaned and chalked.i doubt that the old timers climbed on that tho.would have been passed of as not worth it.

[Jacqusie]

Or more likely not looking at all.

Oh but I am, I am, and I have word of a mighty boulder perched hi o'top a moor in deepest Bumblefuk...

My Hill walking credentials notwithstanding, seeking is one thing, climbing is another as you know fiend 

[Jim]

So it boils down to the fact that its been put in the wrong thread, no need to get so upset, its been a slow week in bouldering news so it can go in, who cares? I mean the house of commons speaker resigns and whats on the front page of the tabloids, Peter & fucking Jordan
I for one am gratefull for the information, as soon as we can work out were these problem are I shall hopefully go and do/try them.

[account_inactive]

Cresta log hahahahaha

[Andy B]

...And then bouldering consumerists like Andy B will get nice guides so they can go tick all the good problems...

In what way am I "bouldering consumerist," could you explain what one of those is? Is this an attempt at an insult Adam?

[clm]

Yay. its started again.  why do we all turn into such twats sometimes?

Dense is my sage.

having read this thread all the way through in one hit it looks like a lot of people aren't working or sit on the internet in the office.

sloper, travs, and r-mam all i can suggest is to get together and have a group hug.

this is how it works. if i climb 6a i have no interest in reporting a 4b problem i've just done. if i climb 7a i have no interest in reporting a 6a problem i've just done. when the grades get closer to what more people perceive as a good grade ie 7a i will start reporting. the fact that i have climbed a 6a that someone claims is new x years later doesn't change the fact that i climbed it x years before, whether i could be arsed to report it (see this paragraph for details) or not.

[Fiend]

How much on the face of business should go in, or what about the left and right arete eliminates on the 'ultimate gritstone experience'.

Green Mile was done before UGE, maybe the right arete was too.

Face of Business should be renamed Face of LOG, it's limestone on grit, I can't think of a less inspiring bit of grit.

Paul Mitchell's new things are nonsense too.

I think JB probably has words to say on the logness of some new problems being claimed, not just yours.

In fact I suspect it's a general point about "claim everything" mentality, rather than just personal digs, although I know people just love to mistake things as personal digs.

[butters]

Green Mile was done before UGE, maybe the right arete was too.

Really? I would have thought that UGE was the line on that bloc - certainly is to my eyes but then what do I know.

bluebrad

[grumpycrumpy]

Just because guide books exist it doesn't mean you have to use them ... They're a useful tool , nothing more ...     

[Fiend]

Ya rly, butters.

[Bonjoy]

Dense is my sage.

He's my Dill

[SA Chris]

Dense is my sage.

He's my Dill

do??

[bigphil]

why do we all turn into such twats sometimes?

Must be the shit weather we've been having, and not being able to get out.  Wish I'd seen this thread earlier though, I could have checked these new problems out and made my own mind up last night.

[c.j.d.]

Fuck me, its like losing your hand for stealing an orange.  I must remember to double check my first ascent credentials at the risk of being raped and pilaged by the lynch mob. 

Mr Long, I'm sure that we have all claimed something new, only to find out its a re-climb at some point - who gives a shit, at least somebody out there is still in touch with a sense of adventure, as opposed to throwing laps on the same old shit...

*get out clause - no offence meant to anybody - no, really.

[Offwidth]

"The things I uncovered were very, very dirty including heather growing from some of the holds and the rock was very very scrittly but soon brushed up and is now nice and solid."

I've cleaned similar obscure east facing open moorland stuff that took only a few years to return to this state. At Upper Matlock Quarries yesterday evening I saw some problems that were returning to nature in a year after a major clean. If problems are being described for the first time in public and the grades are easy or middling, aren't claims best left as 'traditional' ?.

[Johnny Brown]

Ooof! Offwidth in nail-on-head shocker!