Quote from: Stu Littlefair on October 12, 2021, 07:47:37 amWe should use the world’s smallest violin for that....one so tiny that only a physicist like yourself will have the equipment to determine it's existence!!
We should use the world’s smallest violin for that
(or listening to your tall/short mate)
Jimmy Webb and Sharma are around 6 foot.
In terms of FA I would prefer if people went for a grade and used an adjective if they were not sure exactly where it sat, so hard 9b or soft 9b+ in case of erabor.
6 foot is tall. UK/USA average is 5'9- 5'10". I would say the most common elite build is not outlandish, >5'10" and <70kg. There are lots of very good short climbers too but I think there are a lot more climbs much harder/ impossible for the short than for the tall. Not being able to reach a hold generally causes a step change in difficulty.
Makes me think of Zoolook - everyone considers it right at the top of the grade, but it still gets 8a.
Quote from: NaoB on October 12, 2021, 11:43:20 pmMakes me think of Zoolook - everyone considers it right at the top of the grade, but it still gets 8a.Whoa there! - Not me! It was the first 8a I did (1994!) and the first 8a for a couple of my mates with similar climbing profile. And yes it was super polished then too. At the time I done one 7c+ and two 7c’s and a ton of E5 trad climbing. We had stamina and technique but were weak. As an indication I literally didn’t have the strength to dog the moves on Raindogs let alone the even harder moves on Baboo Baboo or GBH and it took a lot of work over the following few years to get up to the level of strength. I’m sure this weakness is laughable to Millennials but it shows that Zoolook is still doable by someone who would be shut down on easy steep boulder problems.I think it is an interesting case where the profile of the notionally average climber has changed in the same way that Brown/Whillans cracks became averagely harder as climbers spent less time crack climbing. For climber’s now Zoolook might feel relatively harder than climbers back then. Whether that means it is 8a+ now because of changing trends I have no idea but it feels unlikely.
Was it a relatively quick tick for you back then Shark? I’ve only hadn’t quick tickle but it felt tricky for sure - haven’t been on raindogs or GBH though. I had only climbed a couple of 8as back then and none in the uk. It’s one I’m very keen for at some point though
I once went climbing with lynn hill (check me) it was a humbling experience and definitely stopped me using the reach card as much.
6 foot is above average, not massively tall -
I’m calling bullshit. Impossible is a strong word. I bet lynn hill wouldn’t say they were impossible even if she couldn’t do them, which is probably quite telling. I bet if hazel was to revisit them she might actually find that some of those impossible problems aren’t actually impossible for her anymore. Ben’s a great example, there are quite a lot of moves at Stanage,turns out there’s only one which might be impossible for him, I think shorty’s should stop moaning. As should lanky streaks. In general 99.8% of the time it’s an excuse.
One of them is going to get up brass monkeys and the other isn’t.
I bet lynn hill wouldn’t say they were impossible even if she couldn’t do them
QuoteI bet lynn hill wouldn’t say they were impossible even if she couldn’t do themSeriously? Have you been on the brownies again? Fuck Lynn Hill and her positive mental attitude.
Seriously? Have you been on the brownies again? Fuck Lynn Hill and her positive mental attitude. Here in the North of England we call it as it is, and if it's a grim November afternoon and you're getting nowhere on some piece of shit problem anyone not a total midget has already lanked and moved on, you're entitled to call it impossible. Even if what you really mean is somewhat harder than the given grade. I don't remember you being so enthusiastic about Marc LeMenestrel's growth mindset platitudes. Or is he just the wrong sort of shortie?
Quote from: Stu Littlefair on October 13, 2021, 06:31:16 pmOne of them is going to get up brass monkeys and the other isn’t. Exactly. We've all been out climbing and seen someone tall reach past the crux, and we've all seen someone short have a whole new crux handed to them. The reason short climbers are well represented in the upper echelons because if you're short you have to get really good to compensate for your height. Likewise the very tall are under represented because, operating on climbs overwhelming developed, graded or set by shorter climbers they rarely get the opportunity to develop any actual skill when there is so much low-hanging fruit to be had by lanking everything. Meanwhile those pushing the standards - Livesey, Fawcett, Moffatt, Moon, Sharma, Ondra, Honnold etc - are all 6 footers or at least a couple of inches the right side of average. Tall enough to have an advantage but not so much they miss the boat.