Carrying on from another thread, what's going through the minds of these climbers who chip holds?
I mean, they can't be that deluded enough to think that they've climbed the original problem if they've improved holds, so deep down they know that climbing the problem once chipped is pointless?
I'm not saying I'd do it myself (nor am I saying I wouldn't) but I can see some logic in someone who's discovered a new boulder having a fiddle around with holds that may be vulnerable to breakage in the near future, perhaps even a bit of 'comfortising' if it's the difference between a potentially great problem or one that may cut your hand off and nobody will want to climb but I just cannot understand why someone would improve holds on an established problem, it just doesn't make sense?
If the whole Redhead/Dawes story is true that Redhead purposely broke the hold off of Indian Face, I can understand the purpose in that situation, even if I don't approve.
Anyone got some insight into the mind of the chipper?
