[Greg C]

This is quite interesting...
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?n=68768
http://www.planetfear.com/climbing/forum/t.html?t=2353

Is it really Malcom Smith and if so what do you reckon?

[dave]

fuck knows. but whoever he is hes probably right - certainly seemd very odd to me that in the space of a couple of years 8c were dropping like flies in these arse-end-of-nowhere places in austria etc, yet still an ascent of an 8b in font was still rare.

[Kim]

I reckon it's just someone trying to have a dig at Si O'Conor for grading his thing on Skye 8c.

The topic title on CT is proper tabloid stylee tho  :D

[squeek]

I liked the "According to this random web site, who made it's own grading scale for the world's elite boulders, there are no UKBoulders in the top ten".  Although if you count john gaskins problems, he'd be there somewhere I think, 1 V15, at least 1 V14, at least 1 V13 (don't know exact numbers/ascents).  Mick must be bored.

[Big Frank]

It's also noticable that none of Gaskins problems appear on this list, from the same site where Mick got his top ten!
http://www.australianbouldering.com/world.html
Just more bloody ozys that dont like to think that the UK's up there with the rest of them!

[Si O'Conor]

...

[a dense loner]

have just been lookin at the first links on this thread. O my god. thank god i use this site is all i can say!!!  :D

how can anyone put up with so much shit bein spun by so many people who can't climb them grades anyway??? the world is a crazy place :!:

[a dense loner]

i take one thing back. leeroy smith cooper talks a lot of sense, even though he should be writing westerns with a name like that!

[ian h]

mick ryan on c.t. should really wind his neck in. he spoutes a load a shit

[Bubba]

Yes, but he's one of the Rockfax team so it's in his interest to post controversial posts and keep the place active.

I think his tongue is often firmly in cheek but people don't get it.

[Greg C]

Reading these threads got me thinking about whether different styles of climbing, and the rock types they are on might be worth considering when it comes to  deciding whether a grade is possible at the present time. Confussed? I' ll try explain my theory...

The V-Grade was developed in the US primarily for the thuggy, crimpy, prows, presses, walls and roofs of Heuco then quickly spread to the granite, basalt and limestone of the rest of the countries major bouldering venues.
Where as the Font grade was developed longer ago and over a number of years in Fontainbleau and puts alot more emphasis on techneque and body positioning when considering a grade for a problem.
For these reasons I chose to use V-Grades when grading a lot of problems round are way as they are mainly on limestone, rhyolite etc. And I feel this grading system works better for these rock types. (Obviously there is always the odd exception!)

Which gets to my point (at last phew!) perhaps it is not possible to have a Font 8c at the moment as this would be unthinkably technical, although maybe it is possible to have a V15, as this is down to brute strength and stamina much more so (look at most current 8c/V15's) and I think, judging by the likes of Gaskins, Nicole etc. modern elite boulders are considerablly stronger than 10 years ago. (This is where you all chip in and tell me John Gill climbed V16 in 1702!!)

Now I know this is where everybody starts going well grades have to equate, but do they, I wonder? I think at this top end spectrum that so few of us will ever reach there is the possibility that the two grade system do not equate, just a thought.  

I know this is all speculation and philosophizing but hey thats what forums are for!

[Adam Lincoln]

Certainly makes sense Gregory, and food for thought...

[dave]

I get your point, but I think you're complicating matters a bit really - the grade scale (whichever one you use) is just to indicate the difficulty, i don't see the style of the problem being indicative of a preference for a particular grading system. ok some styles of problem are harder to grade accuratley than others, but still...

lets take font for example, where people seem to generalize the climbing as "techneque and body positioning". now there are still pleanty of brute crimping and thuggery problems in font that wouldn't be out of place in hueco or vosemite, but the locals still use font grades for these problems are they work just as well as with all the other problems. I don't see any reason to, say, grade abbe resina 7c yet give carnage V8.

similarly in the USA in all the sick slopey places like HP40 etc they still manage to use V grades ok. what i'm saying is a crimpy thuggy 7c/V9 is as hard as a technical slopey 7c/V9. afteral on routes in the uk we don't have a different grade scale for fingercracks as opposed to slabs.

[Bubba]

I agree with Dave - the grading scale is just to represent difficulty, not "technical content" as opposed to "necessary power". It's just complicating things too much and where would it end?

If you walk up to a problem of any grade, you can usually quickly establish whether it's difficulty arises from say fiendish smeary technicality or from just yarding between tiny holds on a 50 degree wall.

So, I don't see why you couldn't have a technical V15 or a brutal 8c, they're just different labels for the same thing.

[dave]

anyway, font 8c does exist in font dunnit? that "trip hop" ting for a start.

[AndyR]

I get your point, but I think you're complicating matters a bit really - the grade scale (whichever one you use) is just to indicate the difficulty, i don't see the style of the problem being indicative of a preference for a particular grading system. ok some styles of problem are harder to grade accuratley than others, but still...

Have to agree with Dave here - I think the main problems are that local grading scales are usually well worked out, as local climbers tend to talk to each other and grades get adjusted locally - hence, in Yorkshire, grades at all the crags are reasonably (as they'll ever be) in line with each other - same in the peak, wales, scotland, Ireland etc.  However, it's very hard to get international match-up, as there aren't that many boulderers going around to various locations around the world, for more than a short break, part of a bouldering trip etc, so it's very hard to reach international concensus - particularly when you throw in the time taken to adjust to different rock types etc.  Combined with all this is the fact that the very hardest problems take so long to do - Monks life took ten years and he doesn't live very far away - some visiting climber wanting to do this problem is either going to have to be much better than Malc, move to the area or get very lucky!

What's my point? I guess it's that problems may well be 8c in certain bouldering areas using the grade progression that they've got going on there - if this is ever going to be sorted, it will only be through the top twenty (or whatever) boulderers in the world visiting other areas for prolonged periods of time and reassessing the grades back at their local patch.......

[Greg C]

Hi Dave,
Firstly it was only a thought, I didn't say it was right or wrong. And of course I thought about all your points about grades working for all types of problems especially V2/Fnt6a to V11/8a. If you just take the easier stuff in somewhere like font (ie. stuff done in the early days of development) the amount of people who are sick strong who find 6a nails but like you say do some new 7c crimpy walll relativley quickly is afair few.
Which leads me to think that the Font grade was originally developed with techneque in mind, obviously your not going to use a new system on different styles of climbing in the same area.

If you look at  La Alchamist V13/fnt8b (spelling sorry!) in Font before it was fucked it looks a lot harder to work out than Walk Away which is obvious to work out, doesn't mean LaAl is harder though. As to hold the holds on WA is sick let alone do anything off them.

This sounds like the ramblings of a mad man and maybe it is but hey its raining.

[a dense loner]

this is what i have been thinkin since i started climbing eight long years ago. the areas or the systems don't have to equate at all. we just have to make them so we can abuse each other geographically. u can't really even compare problems on the same rock half the time, let alone tryin to compare different types of rock.

a case in point, i would grade most grit probs in the peak using font grades because it suits the rock. however at longridge i would use V grades because it suits the rock. but never the twain shall meet. don't worry i still find time to fit english grades in.

this is us banging on about higher grades but it would be exactly the same for someone climbing 5c and someone climbing 4c. in time we will have people arguing on forums about thats not 9a+ it's easy 9a, and not giving a thought to the lowly grades of 7c+/8a. which is only the same as what we do now.

even the great jon bon jovi said 'only the grades will change'

[dave]

the amount of people who are sick strong who find 6a nails but like you say do some new 7c crimpy walll relativley quickly is afair few.
Which leads me to think that the Font grade was originally developed with techneque in mind, ....

i know what you mean about the easier stuff in font seeming hard for the grade, but thats probably more the case that they are graded in guides by people (godoffe, montchausse etc) who have climbed them 1000s of times thus don't really have that much of a grasp of how a first-timer feels on them. plus a 7c wall with 3 crimps generally leaves less options to explore than a 6a blunt arete/slab with no obvious holds! we've all been there....

[Greg C]

I have read all the posts again and i'm swayed that I'm talking some good sense but mainly bollocks, plus if we all keep pointing out glaringly obvious points it will end up like one of those 150 post threads on CT that never solve anything.

Have you read that shite on CT abot Chris Sharma earning over $100,000 a year I don't reckon thats true? I don't think he can earn more than $55,000 at the most!!

5.10 £15,000/20,000
PRANA $10,000
METOLIOUS $5000
COMPS $20,000 max

TOTAL $55,000

[Bubba]

Don't forget his sponsorship from the BC Marijuana Producers Alliance  :wink:

[Adam Lincoln]

I have read all the posts again and i'm swayed that I'm talking some good sense but mainly bollocks, plus if we all keep pointing out glaringly obvious points it will end up like one of those 150 post threads on CT that never solve anything.

Have you read that shite on CT abot Chris Sharma earning over $100,000 a year I don't reckon thats true? I don't think he can earn more than $55,000 at the most!!

5.10 £15,000/20,000
PRANA $10,000
METOLIOUS $5000
COMPS $20,000 max

TOTAL $55,000

Where did you get those figures from Greg?

Interesting if true.

Would think he would get more than that off Prana and. Also from 5.10

Maybe wrong though

I mean thats only about 30k. Bet Leo isnt far off that. Mid twenties

[Greg C]

They are not exact figures but educated guesses from info I know that other companies have obtained when looking into aquiring his services for brand promotion.

Leo gets shed loads cos Berghaus don't have a fucking clue what consists value for money!
Apparently Gresham and Emmett are always using that example to try and coin more cash out of Mountain Hardwear but they must not be quite as dense a Bergahaus, ha ha!  

[Adam Lincoln]

Where Mad Rock after coaxing him over to them? Or is that secret ;-)

[Greg C]

If Sharma does get more than $20,000 from 5.10 surley they should start putting a bit more cash into making shoes as no shops ever seem to have enough stock to sell!

Its like the Halifax Bank, they spend shed loads on advertising on TV but the service they supply is well shite! Start giving your staff more money and you might be able to get cashiers a bit older than 16 with IQ of a travel agent you crap bastards, I'm off to HSBC!