[Fiend]

Brilliant 

[Cornish]

Off topic here but this book is comedy gold. Crowley also allures to how First ascents should be done "I settled the point [that he could climb some choss on the south coast] by walking up, smoking my pipe with my dog; I had no woman available. In nine and a half minutes.."

As if on-sighting weren't enough, now we've got to get a dog up there and smoke a pipe

[Will Hunt]

Abominable sex magick practitioner and climbing heathen:

He's even gone to such lengths as to position the mat so that, in the event of a fall, the rock below him will still be able to explore the deepest recesses of his anal passage.
#AuthenticAnalExperience

[teestub]

He's even gone to such lengths as to position the mat so that, in the event of a fall, the rock below him will still be able to explore the deepest recesses of his anal passage.
#AuthenticAnalExperience

He’s also gone to the lengths of buying two of the shittest bouldering mats on the market just to make sure he can’t be accused of being an Organic bouncy castle pad party twat, or whatever the specific insult was.

[user deactivated]

Wanker

[user deactivated]

No hang on it was Bellend

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Brilliant above with the Fiend/Self styled wickedest man in the world look alike.

In quick reply to JB, I think your posts turns things into something self referential that you take personal injury from, and then defend.

I think any argument of the "genie ain't going back in the bottle" sort is particularly weak, and can be used to "justify" many things.

When I use the word "question", I use it very much in the sense that there are many different approaches, and it's very easy for fashionable trends to be accepted without being thought about - hence the significance of the original posts about the FC H point article.

This thread isn't really about what JB does with pads, but it comes across to me as though you're trying to defend some legitimacy.

You're presenting your argument as if using pads saves the rock from the damage caused from Headpointing. I think that's a load of rubbish, and a false dichotomy.

Pads aren't going to make much difference to me throwing a rope down something. I'd suggest that's probably also the case with the sort of routes Franco is referring to.

My personal preference is to work towards a simpler approach, and I do question my own motives, and especially whether I need to climb a particular route. I'd rather look to improve, than to start using pads to "open up more rock". There's a payoff there for me, when I go off to climb elsewhere.

I don't think it's overstating the case to consider the number of people who will throw themselves at things above a stack of pads, who wouldn't do otherwise.

I think Crescent Arete at Stanage is a great example. I think there are many people who will have climbed it above pads who wouldn't have done it otherwise - and neither would they have thrown a rope down it!

That's not the same thing as saying they shouldn't be doing it, but it's a small beautiful route which is getting trashed.

Then we have routes like Kaluza-Klein which are also getting trashed, but through head pointing. Using pads won't stop that.

The question of damage to the rock isn't answered by trying to claim that one approach damages /another approach saves.

We all damage the rock - and the environment. I think it's good to look at what we all do, and why.

Through the Internet, there is now so much more emphasis placed on "getting up stuff", than on approach/engagement.

[Johnny Brown]

In quick reply to JB, I think your posts turns things into something self referential that you take personal injury from, and then defend.

No, don't worry, that's not what going on. Nothing personal in this thread I've noticed.

This thread isn't really about what JB does with pads, but it comes across to me as though you're trying to defend some legitimacy.

No, again. I'm using examples to try to illustrate my thinking, and because I think it's important to remember climbing is grounded in the particular and ethics are very sensitive to this. I'm sure some may see it as trumpeting, ah well.

When I use the word "question", I use it very much in the sense that there are many different approaches, and it's very easy for fashionable trends to be accepted without being thought about

Okay, yes I agree entirely.

I think any argument of the "genie ain't going back in the bottle" sort is particularly weak, and can be used to "justify" many things.

It wasn't intended as an argument, just a statement of fact. It's nice to pontificate about different approaches, it's also important to engage with reality. Long, disappointing experience has taught me most people aren't interested in the pontificating.

You're presenting your argument as if using pads saves the rock from the damage caused from Headpointing. I think that's a load of rubbish, and a false dichotomy.

Well no, that's because you've over-simplified it. I think a more general ground-up mentality would raise the barrier to entry, result in less traffic, and also (ime) mean better experiences for the climber. Pads, in my experience, encourage a ground-up approach.

Pads aren't going to make much difference to me throwing a rope down something. I'd suggest that's probably also the case with the sort of routes Franco is referring to.

Not sure I understand. You're saying pads are irrelevant to many headpoints? Sure. Who would deny that?

I don't think it's overstating the case to consider the number of people who will throw themselves at things above a stack of pads, who wouldn't do otherwise.

I think Crescent Arete at Stanage is a great example. I think there are many people who will have climbed it above pads who wouldn't have done it otherwise - and neither would they have thrown a rope down it!

Maybe, I'm not sure. When I moved here in '96 there were a lot less boulderers in the Peak, less boulder problems, no mats. Crescent arete was absolutely top of our list to do, there were always people on it. In fact I'd say on the typical evening bouldering circuit it was more popular than it is now. Bouldering is a lot more popular yes, as I've said that's a complicated many-factored thing. But it's a beautiful piece of rock that climbs as well as it looks. To just point at pads seems facile to me.

That's not the same thing as saying they shouldn't be doing it, but it's a small beautiful route which is getting trashed

So what do you suggest? I don't think there are easy answers. I've done it, you've done it and I'm not about to deny others that experience. I do think pads are protecting the ground but long term it may need some work similar to that done around the Pebble etc. Unlike the ground, the rock can't recover. I don't see that a ban would achieve anything, and I don't think a pad ban would be understood or respected.

Then we have routes like Kaluza-Klein which are also getting trashed, but through head pointing. Using pads won't stop that.

No, but even on this route I think a more general ground-up mentality would result in less traffic. Yes you could argue the gear might get more hammer, but I suspect not.

question of damage to the rock isn't answered by trying to claim that one approach damages /another approach saves.

Climbing is popular. The rock is fragile. People aren't that interested in questioning their approach, unfortunately. What I think you can do is push a broad approach (ground-up) that tends to raise the barrier to entry. In other areas - the North York Moors perhaps - there might be a case to be made that what is needed is more headpoint E6-8s.

Through the Internet, there is now so much more emphasis placed on "getting up stuff", than on approach/engagement.

We're basically mostly agreed Dave. I just don't think that pads are the root problem, nor do I think to suggest they are really engages with our reality in a helpful way.

I would really like to see more people like Andy W pushing alternative approaches. And the Olympics are coming...

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Well that's a very long reply JB.

If I can put my position as simply as I can.

I would like many things to be seen for what they are.

For example, I would like to see "Ground Up" mean exactly what it says.

I would like Headpointing seen as top-rope practice - along with anything else that compromises the style of ascent.

We all cheat to varying degrees.

I think you've given an interpretation of my points to support your position, in the same way that people tend to interpret other things to support what they do.

[monkoffunk]

In quick reply...

417 words

very long reply.

519 words



It's good that we have these definitions.

[Andy W]

An onsight of a route I have redpointed is only more important from the perspective of a sporting context, not from my perspective.

Ah right, I see where you're coming from now, guessing the 'W' is for Whall? Apologies if I was patronising above, I'm very interested in your approach but I think it is at significant tangent to this thread (and will throw most without some introduction).

In recent years I've realised my own climbing is driven by elements of ritual and psychogeography as much as sporting. But that doesn't mean I'm operating outside the sporting context. Clearly you are sticking with established concepts of success, styles and grades too.   So you're saying you value a protracted struggle more than a flash of inspiration, you're looking for a long term relationship rather than a quick fling? I don't see any problem with that within or without the sporting context. But that doesn't mean a quicker ascent, whether by you or someone else, on the same route/problem isn't a better display of climbing? If not surely you'd end up in a place where you'd be purposely failing to prolong the relationship? Have I finally understood what Shark is up to?

Johnny, thanks not really patronising and yes the W is for Whall and yes I was probably heading of on a tangent, another time maybe

[DAVETHOMAS90]

I've been thinking about this for a little while, and prompted by a chance "meeting" with JB - well he walked past my window - now is probably an opportune time to comment.

I felt I was insensitive to JB's own motivations while trying to pick apart some of the things we were all saying about our different approaches and perspectives towards the game we call climbing.

At the same time, I think it's an important feature of - this esp. - forum, that we try to look a bit more closely at some of the things we say/do.

In his fine collection of essays "Deep Play", Paul Pritchard tries to explore some of the hidden/ulterior motives expressed through what we do on rock. Of course "Games Climbers Play" is a more humorous take on the same thing.

Dan Cheetham's recent threads also seem like a brave and important attempt to put things out there in the open - in a "no stone left unturned (patio-building  )" kind of way.

I'll start by saying that the ultimate motives for our climbing are, deep down, largely the same. That might seem like a bold claim, but it's something I've believed and tried to explore for a long time. That's not the same thing as saying that we all express what we do in the same way, or of course highlight the same things that we enjoy more overtly. Clearly.

Climbing is an ultimately selfish activity - in my view, and those of many others of course!
It's easy to take that as a negative judgement - as have a lot of the things I've said above. That's not intentional, or correct. Maybe the word "irrational" would be better, but again, that comes with it's own set of connotations.

I mean "selfish", in the way that drug taking is selfish. I have very little doubt that the comfort I get from clinging to bits of rock is little different from the comfort that any other addict seeks. We could say the same things about many other behaviours; I'd rather go to the rockface than have a heroin addiction, or suffer from anorexia. (I find all my meds in skips anyway.)

It's the going to which is significant. Reaching into the Darkness and finding a crimp ( sorry, who is that? It's the best avatar subtitle on the site) is the dream; discovering that it isn't there, is the fear. That's what I believe we all share.

We play the game largely to be with the rock. Overly simplistic? Generalisation? Wrong?

The line I think we try to walk, is between defining our sport in ways that seem to be consistent or make sense - the words and definitions we use - and not wanting to question - or take a second look at - what we hold dearest. When we do the latter, sometimes what we say doesn't seem to add up, or it jars very strongly with the way that others want to say/do/play the game.

There's a tension between what we want, and how we talk about it.

I don't think I can say this without also referring to some of the disagreement in the posts above.

There are many things in climbing which I think change the game far more than is commonly acknowledged. I include things like bouldering pads (obviously), drop-testing skyhook placements, stick-clipping bolts (I mean!!), knee pads..

JB suggests that I overstate the difference that pads make for instance. We may not agree on that point, but it's a very good thing to talk about. Shit, I forgot to put stepping off a pad/cheat stack in my list  But I very much think I share and understand the sense of meaning (That may not be the right word. Place?) that JB wants to derive - as I think we all do.

Going back to the point of the start of the thread, Franco very clearly wants to protect something very dear. His headpointing article seems to be a (completely unnecessary in my view) attempt to find a language to justify (and protect) what he does.

The conflict in the posts on this thread comes from the fact that we all understand, but we each want it to be our words that give it a name 

[Fiend]

Back to the verrrry start of this malarkey.

I was chatting to a friend the other day, explaining how because I got tonsilitis and then focused on moving, I never got around to replying to Alan's email demanding that I justify why I should be allowed on the forums (although there's a sneaking suspicion in my mind that perhaps he needs to justify why I should be banned given that I'm not trolling, swearing, abusing anyone, offending advertisers etc - I've actually just checked the posting guidelines (copied below for my own reference) and of course my post doesn't contravene them), I'm still banned from UKC.

During a bit of discussion over this he implied it would be quite farcical for me to be banned for a post, but not actually have that post deleted. After all if the post is that offensive, the first measure is surely to remove it asap, rather than make a mockery of the poster, and still leave the post up......for what reason?? In return I speculated that despite the horror and trauma of posting a criticism of the topic of an article, a bit of controversy (NOT what I sought, I'd much rather be commenting very positively on Caff's guide to onsighting) might not be that problematic given the further discussion, page views, and all important advert views it brings in.

So I very briefly hopped back and checked. My original post, despite apparently being ban-worthy, is still up as the first post. It has a total of 200 likes+dislikes (far more than the original article), and a quick ctrl-f gives a further 40 results for the word Fiend. Thus suggesting that my honest and sincere, if un-extrapolated, input has not been the great detriment to discussion that a ban would imply.

 


That's all. Back to scouring the Churnet guide for anything I missed...



General Post Content
Which Forum? - We provide different forums for different types of discussion - please try to use the right one for your new topic, and don't post duplicates of your topic in more than one forum. Topics in the wrong forum will be moved to a different forum by the moderators. People who persistently post in the wrong forum will have their posts removed instead of moved.
Rude, abusive or politically offensive language - Messages which contain excessive and pointless swearing, or insults aimed at other people, or politically offensive language will be removed.
Mild bad language - Messages with bad language in the title or starter post will also be removed no matter how serious and relevant the topic is. This is done because thread titles are picked up more readily by search engines. This rule includes The Pub and also includes bad language where an ast*risk has been used to disguise it.
Political Propoganda - We don't allow people to use the forums to promote extreme political messages. Controversial topics are suitable for discussion, but people who persistently start posts on the same extreme political topic will be banned from posting.
Private information - Please don't post private/personal information about people you know without asking their permission first. This includes posting the contents of emails without getting permission of the sender.
FAO Threads - Please don't start threads with the title 'FAO xxxx'. If your post really is only "For the Attention of xxxx" then send them an email. If it isn't then title it something that fits in with the concept 'forum'.
Personal relationship issues - This is a public forum and not the place for discussing specific personal relationship issues. We will not tolerate the practice of starting a thread under the pretext that it is a general relationship discussion, yet in reality it refers to a specific issue between two or more individuals.
'Lads' Style Postings - The forum is read by both men and women. Please refrain from crude and sexist comments about other posters, profile photographs or people in the wider media.
Looking for a fight - Threads which set out to look for trouble, invariably create trouble. Don't start them, we don't want them on the forums.
Unqualified links - Posts of just a link can cause problems since the content isn't obvious and people can end up going places they don't expect to. Please state what the link is about and warn people if it contains something which might be undesirable eg. loud auto-playing sound files, unpleasant images or offensive language. Do not attach the words 'not work safe' to a post. If it isn't work safe, then don't post it.
Chatting with your mates - The UKClimbing.com forum has thousands of readers every day. Please don't waste up valuable space by posting your personal messages to your mates - use email for this type of communication.
Blank Discussion Posts - Please don't start posts with single short controversial statements followed by the word 'discuss', or blank except for a link to a controversial article on another site. If it is a topic for discussion then please add some 'discussion'. Topics like this will either be removed or closed to replies.
Dodgy links - Anyone posting links to pr0nographic, racist or other offensive web sites will be banned permanently from the forums without us issuing a warning. It is not acceptable to attach the words 'not work safe' to a post. If it isn't work safe, then don't post it.
'Clone Posts' - Please don't post repeat threads with subtle changes to the title. Although these can sometimes be humorous, they tend to spawn other people doing the same thing which rapidly overruns the forum lists and is a lot of work to moderate.

[andy popp]

Back to scouring the Churnet guide for anything I missed...

Like I told you on FB, Patient Weaver.

[user deactivated]

A skim through those regs looks like they ‘don’t want’ half the internet on their forums. Why in Christ do you want back in Matt?

[Fiend]

So I can post photos of me lowering off a cluster of tri-cams and tied off pebbles off Patient Weaver in blind panic, and reach a wider audience for my shame.

[user deactivated]

Terrible idea, there must be some equally shite internet based publication peddling conspicuously branded bs

[petejh]

There aren't enough threads with 'Franco' in them..

'Franco's Cookbook' next?
Franco's 5 Minute Workout Plan
Franco's Manual of Modern Rope Techniques
Franco's Good Pub Guide
Franco's Translation of the Holy Bible

[user deactivated]

Franco does a lettuce program and spontaneously combusts

[tomtom]

There aren't enough threads with 'Franco' in them..

'Franco's Cookbook' next?
Franco's 5 Minute Workout Plan
Franco's Manual of Modern Rope Techniques
Franco's Good Pub Guide
Franco's Translation of the Holy Bible

'cos he's been busy working on Franco's Brexit Breakthrough :D

[petejh]

Haha now that would get my attention!

[Fiend]

I'm truly sorry for bumping the thread, given the title