[tc]

The following seem to be the outstanding hard problems on Yorkshire Grit in the 1970s. Comments, additions, slander and gossip welcomed! Research continues...
Pebble Wall, V8, Caley, Al Manson
Red Baron, V8, Shipley Glen, Mike Hammill,
Bald Pate Superdirect, V8, Ilkley, Andy Brown.
Jerry's Arete, V9, Bridestones, Jerry Peel

[Pantontino]

Did Jerry really do his Bridestones arete back in the 70s - I always assumed this was early 80s?

I recall an article in High (I think?) back in the late 80s by Ian Horrocks that detailed the history of the Kebs. I'm not sure how you'd get hold of this; perhaps Geoff Birtles has a full collection?

Failing that Micky Johnston will know.

My other thoughts relate to the grades: surely most of these will drop a notch or 2 in these modern revisionist times? Red Baron is certainly not V8, and I have my doubts about the others.

[jonP]

Red Baron is certainly not V8

I love how you can authoritatively state things like this. Red Baron is given V7 on yg.com, but 9 out of 16 votes are for V8. Have you asked 16 people what grade they think Red Baron is?

[Pantontino]

Put your toys back in your pram - It was an opinion, that's all.

Although, an opinion based on 10 years spent living and climbing in Yorkshire, hanging out with numerous different people and talking about climbing on a daily basis - I couldn't say for sure, whether that constitutes more than 16 opinions (I wasn't ticking them off in a note pad), but I know that I've never met anybody who thinks RB is harder than V7.

The relevance of you're web grading polls is highly contestable.
16 opinions is representative of what? 16 out of how many hundreds, perhaps thousands who have climbed RB? Also some opinions are worth more than others. A well travelled climber, will have a much more valid view than an inexperienced one. Your voting system has no way of distinguishing the gravity of the vote.
Also did the people who voted for V8 complete the problem - I don't think you are entitled to an opinion until you've topped out. After all, problems often feel easier when the technique finally clicks.

I've just voted and you're dynamic consensus has shifted to state that the problem is V7.  Perhaps YorkshireGit.com is a good idea after all?

[Kim]

Also did the people who voted for V8 complete the problem - I don't think you are entitled to an opinion until you've topped out. After all, problems often feel easier when the technique finally clicks.

So surely that would lead to undergrading? If things should be graded for how hard they are to complete you've got to take in to account the fact you need enough time for the "technique to click" (or have to be very good/strong to get em quick). The people who are trying them and getting close have at least as good an idea of how hard they are i reckon.

Kimbo.

[Jim]

I think there are two ways about this, I agree with Kim in part but there is also the fact that if you haven't topped out you might be using a duff sequence that makes the problem harder and leads to overgrading

[Pantontino]

I agree to a certain extent that if you are trying a problem for a long time you will have a reasonable grasp of the grade, but I often find that my opinion changes when I finally make it.
I believe you should grade assuming that people have wired all the beta/tricks etc.

I've never considered bouldering to be about flashing or onsighting - its what you've done that counts.

Up problems are often harder to work than traverses, because the crux may be guarded by a hard intro. You will probably get a V7 traverse faster than a V7 up line, but once you have them both wired, they will feel the same (i.e. require the same physical effort).

[dave]

i agree with kim, if waiting for the "technique to click" is a required part of doing the problem then that should be represented in the grade. ok it might feel piss after that but hey once you've done a problem the grade is irrelevant. for example i find trackside at curbar about B5 now, but that doesn't mean its B5 for new visitors trying it for the first time. afterall guidebooks are really to guide a newcomer to an area to say whats worth trying or not. things should be graded for how it feels the first time you do something. after you've done it the grade is irrelevent.

incidentally i think this is the very reason that the font grade is seen to cope badly with sub-grade-7 problems, cos they are graded for how hard they feel when you've done them 100times, like the guidbook writers generally have.

[Adam Lincoln]

i agree with kim, if waiting for the "technique to click" is a required part of doing the problem then that should be represented in the grade. ok it might feel piss after that but hey once you've done a problem the grade is irrelevant. for example i find trackside at curbar about B5 now, but that doesn't mean its B5 for new visitors trying it for the first time. afterall guidebooks are really to guide a newcomer to an area to say whats worth trying or not. things should be graded for how it feels the first time you do something. after you've done it the grade is irrelevent.

incidentally i think this is the very reason that the font grade is seen to cope badly with sub-grade-7 problems, cos they are graded for how hard they feel when you've done them 100times, like the guidbook writers generally have.

Think thats the most sense ive ever heard/read in regards to bouldering!

[Jim]

Word!
Trackside does now feel like B5 although it was B8 before I did it :wink:

[dave]

Think thats the most sense ive ever heard/read in regards to bouldering!

aw shucks

You know i be dropping the science on grading.

[Pantontino]

I don't tend to repeat problems close to my limit. Once I've done them, I move on to the next thing, so I'm not talking about basing an opinion on 100s of ascents - its a bit fresher than that. I guess that does make my grade opinions inconsistent, because I do mid grade and easy problems over and over again as warm ups for whatever my latest project is.

I don't mind initially harsh grades on other people's territory. I expect to have a hard time when I travel to new areas. Part of the fun is tapping into the local style, cracking the code...

[jonP]

Also some opinions are worth more than others.

So should I scrap the voting system and simply ask you for your opinion instead?  Or perhaps I should wait a few years until I've got more experience, then I can dismiss anyone who dares to disagree with me, on the grounds that my opinion is clearly worth more than theirs?

Do you really think that all those who voted V8 for Red Baron are inexperienced, or deluding themselves, or haven't done the problem or are just plain wrong?

I'd agree with you about not being able to assess the difficulty of a problem until you've done it though.

[Pantontino]

I don't think you should scrap the voting system - I think it is a funky little mechanism and arguing about grades is the most natural thing in the world for climbers.

All I was pointing out, is that you shouldn't delude yourself about the significance of your grade polls.

As for the people who voted V8 - obviously I've no idea who they are, what they've done, or whether they have done the problem. I was just pointing out the potential weakness/lack of relevance of the voting system.

RB is famous and classic - and consequently much talked about.
Presumably you believe that all the people that I have spoken with over the years about RB are inexperienced, deluded, liars or just plain wrong?

Finally, I wasn't dismissing anybody, I was merely pointing out that some opinions are worth more than others. If you had a medical problem, whose opinions would you value most: 10 first year nurses, or a time served doctor? According to your system the 10 nurses could out vote the doctor.

That's not an ego thing, that's just a fact.

[tc]

Ah, a scrap - and 'eres me, a nasty little violence-loving Scouser. Seriously, though, thanks for the comments. Any views on the others on the hit list? Obviously therre are other candidates from the early and mid-70s (the Virgin, Syrett's Roof etc etc) but the above seem to represent the hardest of the decade. Anyone fancy arguing about my Sandstone, Peak, Northumberland and Lakes/Lancs lists?

[AndyR]

Red Baron, V8, Shipley Glen, Mike Hammill,

Interestingly (not actually), I met Mike Hammill in Sardinia last week (virtual pint to the geek who knows what route he's on in Extreme Cock?? - and no peeking) - boy does he have big hands! They are total shovels - does that effect the grade of this problem  :wink:

[Johnny Brown]

Arguing about grades ???
Do shit climbers have a valid opinion???


 :321:  
 
THIS IS NOT COCKTALK. Please take such arguments over there.

This site is for opinionated experts to tell each other (preferably in a wigga stylee) what they know to be the correct grade. The only arguments should be battles of one-upmanship about how far to downgrade stuff.

For my part, I would like to point out that pantontino is a lanky bastard, which simple fact clearly makes him unfit to grade flour. Ex-pat yorkshire or not, living in 'beris also means he has little or no technique.

As an example, in his latest climber article he sees fit to give Fight on Black his much vaunted V8+ filler-in grade, despite it being a path if you don't try to overcome it with reach and strength. However, said qualities are of some use on Red Baron....

[AndyR]

...in his latest climber article he sees fit to give Fight on Black his much vaunted V8+ filler-in grade...

I know, it's like Fiend (permanent CT fixture for those who don't know, though I suspect you all unfortunately do) getting his own column in a magazine and trying to foist his own unnecessary grading system on us all  :wink:

[jonP]

Surely Fight on Black was done years ago - what's it doing in a "new developments in bouldering"-type column?

[grimer]

all very rocktalk inasmuch as someone posts a very interseting question followed by lots of raging on subjects with no relation to the question. I'd take your opinion on it all Tim. You were there as the rock cooled. Well, we've got your opinions for Cheshire sandstone and Yorkshire. So what about the Peak?

And I bet the first ascents of all these hard problems would be interesting tales. Maybe in a way more illuminating than the pure difficulty of them all, in what they said about the state of climbing at their time.

It is also interesting to compare what is seen as hard now with what was seen as hard at the time. One example is Gaia and the New Statesman, both seen as breakthrough E8 at the time, but Statesman was obviously miles harder than Gaia (apologies to place such examples on  a bouldering website)

[Johnny Brown]

...can't help thinkin they probably didn't think much of 'em at the time. There were still decent full-size lines to go at.

Good examples being the two mentioned. Although they might represent top and bottom E8 now ('specially since that tall irish guy shook his way up), as far as I know gaia was climbed in much better style.  johnny never top-roped the top half, thinking it would be easy. Hence the fifteen minutes blubbering at the 'rest' at the top of the groove as described in stone monkey. A far cry from the 'robotic' style of todays ascents

[dave]

This site is for opinionated experts to tell each other (preferably in a wigga stylee) what they know to be the correct grade. The only arguments should be battles of one-upmanship about how far to downgrade stuff.....

AAAAY-men to that brutha.

I'm off to strip down my desert eagle.

[Pantontino]

Oi! Grimer, you sanctimoneous tree hugging guffer, of course grades matter. Your last paragraph illustrates my point well: History should not be looked at through sentimental, rose-tinted spectacles.

...and Johnny Brown - I do hope you've cast yer vote on YorkshireGit.com. FOB - V6? Sounds reasonable to me.

By the way, I've got some V8+ t-shirts printed up, if Robinson and Pearson would like to help spread the word - remember there is no such thing as bad publicity...

[tc]

"History should not be looked at through sentimental, rose-tinted spectacles."

Quite right, too. Nostalgia isn't like it used to be.

[SA Chris]

boy does he have big hands! They are total shovels - does that effect the grade of this problem  :wink:

Met him once at a bouldering spot developed in the cotswolds. Swear hes a mutant. Had no idea who he was at the time, but top bloke though.

[AndyR]

By the way, I've got some V8+ t-shirts printed up, if Robinson and Pearson would like to help spread the word - remember there is no such thing as bad publicity...

Obviously, I'd love to, but I don't feel I'm worthy of promoting such a fine idea  

[Bubba]

Come on' Yorkshiregrit, you know you want one really  

[dave]

speaking of yorkshiregrit.com, i see you guys have ben visited by Fiend - 36 comments in one sitting - what a sad fuck!

[jonP]

Come on' Yorkshiregrit, you know you want one really

Can I have one with V8+ on the front and the ten rules of bouldering on the back?

[grimer]

Look Simon, I don't like you to accuse me of being sanctimonious. And furthermore, I would like it to be pointed out that I only hug trees after I have chopped them down.

My point is we should be looking at grades in this historical sense. Here's an example. Goliath was climbed in 1956, or wahatever, and now gets E5. But does that mean Don Whillans was climbing E5 in 1956, and if so, why didn't he do Alien or Nosferatu or Footless Crow. But Goliath wasn't E5 when it was done, not because it has gotten harder, but because the idea of E5 wasn't there, it was just another crack. Bancrioft said in his day it was just the next one you did after the Rasp, no big deal. And if you look at grades, Goliath gets E5 and Sentinel Crack gets E2. But soloing Sentinel, as Whillans did, is a much greater achievement, a much bigger lead. So grades don't really tell you the important thing, ie, where were the breakthroughs made.

And that goes for bouldering too. Walk on By got a couple of repeats a few years ago and got really hyped as a major hard route well ahead of its time. And it probably was desperate, but at the time, crimpy vertical walls were what people climbed on, training on Broomgroove wall and such like. You might get some powerful and steep slappy problem now that today gets a easier grade that maybe 70s and 80s crimpmasters couldn't touch.

So it's impotent to find out if the things with the bigger grades today actually were the breakthoughs. And even if Gaia gets downgraded, in years to come people will still need to remember that its first ascent was a breakthrough. Tall Irishmen aside. On the subject of which, I also intend to try Meshuga sometime, in order to become the first truly shit climber to climb E9. That's what I'm talking about. BREAKTHROUGHS.

[dave]

On the subject of which, I also intend to try Meshuga sometime, in order to become the first truly shit climber to climb E9. That's what I'm talking about. BREAKTHROUGHS.

didn't seb beat you to that?  :wink:

[grimer]

Drat. E10 here I come.

[jonP]

You could achieve long lasting fame by inventing a new bouldering grade.  V7+ maybe?

[tc]

One of the main problems in introducing this kind of perspective is that in the 70's, bouldering just wasn't taken as seriously as now, and generally, problems weren't recorded unless they were 'lines' or micro-routes (see Yorks grit list above).  Hardly surprising now, that we see the need for a history lesson

[AndyR]

speaking of yorkshiregrit.com, i see you guys have ben visited by Fiend - 36 comments in one sitting - what a sad fuck!

Methinks he has some 'issues'....... :?

[Big Frank]

speaking of yorkshiregrit.com, i see you guys have ben visited by Fiend - 36 comments in one sitting - what a sad fuck!

Methinks he has some 'issues'....... :?

Methinks he's a fucking mental :asshole:
?

[Big Frank]

You could achieve long lasting fame by inventing a new bouldering grade.  V7+ maybe?

I always liked the idea of VD but trad climbers already have that!

[Jim]

You could achieve long lasting fame by inventing a new bouldering grade.  V7+ maybe?

I always fancied V8-. The plus thing's already been done