[slackline]

You are right.  But I think that in an ideal world it should be a science where an individual grades a routes based on how it fits within his/her own database of experience, and then the actual grade of the route is a mean or median of a large number of ascentionists opinions.

Ideally yes, but each individuals database of experience will be different by virtue of a) their varying morphology 'cause if you're > 190cm you're going to have a different sequence to my short arse height of 176cm (reading a guide book the other day there was a route that was 5c/6c (English) based on height); b) different problems in varying conditions. 

You might find that different people who are similar heights/ape-index tend to have opinions on grades that correlate though.

[Pitcairn]

Ideally yes, but each individuals database of experience will be different by virtue of a) their varying morphology 'cause if you're > 190cm you're going to have a different sequence to my short arse height of 176cm (reading a guide book the other day there was a route that was 5c/6c (English) based on height); b) different problems in varying conditions. 

You might find that different people who are similar heights/ape-index tend to have opinions on grades that correlate though.

Of course. This is why people have different opinions on grades and is exactly the reason why one needs a range of opinions from a range of different morphologies.  And this is the reason why people shouldnt crap themselves if they cant do a route of the same grade they did last week...

Getting even more 

 

[Adam Lincoln]

Another 8b+ vote for Jade, James Webb this time.

[SA Chris]

Getting even more 

To continue the offness, I think that morphology is a minor factor in grade variation. Even if two people have identical physical structures, their opinions on a grade of a problem can vary wildly, due to a dozen or so other factors. It's a quagmire for sure.

[account_inactive]

[Fiend]

Morphology always seems to be a minor factor for those people who can reach straight past hard moves 

[Jaspersharpe]

Morphology always seems to be a major factor for us whingeing shortarsed dwarf types. 

[Fiend]

 

[Pitcairn]

To continue the offness, I think that morphology is a minor factor in grade variation. Even if two people have identical physical structures, their opinions on a grade of a problem can vary wildly, due to a dozen or so other factors. It's a quagmire for sure.

Its not a quagmire!  Routes that have more specific moves that are either morphology or technique dependant will have a greater range of grades from ascensionists.  The real grade is still the mean or median but these problems have a large standard deviation - 7b +/- 1.5 grades rather than 7b +/- 0.5 grades.  I think its simple. 

 

PS.  There is NOTHING worse than whingeing shortarsed dwarfs 

[SA Chris]

Agree re shortarses, but don't want to discuss other further as too off topic already. Can it be extracted and continued on its own?

[Jaspersharpe]

Been done to death already. Best just to ignore them, which is easy enough.

[dave]

Best just to ignore them, which is easy enough.

We're talking about shortarses right? I just look straight ahead horizontally.

[Jaspersharpe]

Exactly.

[shark]

Agree re shortarses, but don't want to discuss other further as too off topic already. Can it be extracted and continued on its own?

Done !

[SA Chris]

Routes that have more specific moves that are either morphology or technique dependant will have a greater range of grades from ascensionists. 

Thank you IO1.

Surely any problem worth doing is dependent on morphology and / or technique to some extent? Struggling to think how any can't be?

[Paul B]

but these problems have a large standard deviation

and become meaningless just like my data points with a high standard deviation, they tell you diddly squat. This isn't AMA2010 its grades.

[slackline]

High variation/standard deviation isn't necessarily that bad a thing, what is the kurtosis like?

[Paul B]

stop it you're as bad as him.

[Pitcairn]

but these problems have a large standard deviation

and become meaningless just like my data points with a high standard deviation, they tell you diddly squat. This isn't AMA2010 its grades.

I dont agree, I think having a large variance tells you a lot about the nature of the problem (or dataset).  Im a geochemist and many processes I study involve a small shift in the mean or median but a big change in the range of values.  This is key to understanding the process.

Maybe its not so useful for grades - Im not suggesting that we have a new grading system with mean + SD (though it would work nicely for the numerical australian system eg. 26 +/- 1.75...  ) but if people are more aware that this is how it is on certain problems then there would be less crying/spraying/gnashing of teeth/toys being thrown from pram etc in general.

I read a study somewhere showing that shortarses are not only annoying but are stupid aswell.

[SA Chris]

I read a study somewhere showing that shortarses are not only annoying but are stupid aswell.

There are a couple of them who are cleverer than a brain pie, but I think they are just deviations (or is that deviants) from the mean.

[rodma]

I read a study somewhere showing that shortarses are not only annoying but are stupid aswell.

I'm sure I read a study about lanky ginger blokes having a tendancy to look down upon shortarse ginger blokes. I can't seem to remember the exact science, but it was definately something to do with morphology 

[Stubbs]

Hiked!

[c.j.d.]

Thats one of those problems that you wish was in the pass.  Looks mint - a proper boulder problem.

With regards to this down grading thing, maybe he just has strong fingers.  He may also have strong arms.  Imagine, he could just be strong.  And tall.... Ponder ponder....

[Jaspersharpe]

Must be easy if he could put his hat back on half way through doing it. I propose 8A+.

[dave]

But wait a minute, if katz can chance boots half way through mr fantastic then changing a hat has to be easier, I suggest 7c+.