[Ged]

this is mostly a concern that Franco has cheated his way to a tick he’s not worthy of?

That has always been the first and last concern that people have about Franco. As we've seen on this thread, he is consistently held to a different standard to everyone else. It's a good job he enjoys the attention, and an even better job that his ego isn't made of glass.

What examples are there of him being held to a different standard?

[Wellsy]

It does seem odd that he receives such acrimony although I'm sure there are long past comments I don't know about

In this case, looking at the footage of it being done in Life on Hold, I think I can spot the mono Franco uses and it does seem in reach of Varian as he moves up to the big pocket? But I appreciate a few feet each way can make a big difference grade wise, too.

[cheque]

He's obviously a narcissist

I agree with the rest of your post but I think this is unfair. The North York Moors guide would look and read very differently if a narcissist had produced it.

[Doylo]

He's obviously a narcissist

I agree with the rest of your post but I think this is unfair. The North York Moors guide would look and read very differently if a narcissist had produced it.

I don’t own it. Just see the internet.

[Johnny Brown]

Shades of this classic thread, where I think you can see it's not just Franco or using extra holds. You can even use less holds than your mates and still be held up as a cop-out cheat.

[IanP]

this is mostly a concern that Franco has cheated his way to a tick he’s not worthy of?

That has always been the first and last concern that people have about Franco. As we've seen on this thread, he is consistently held to a different standard to everyone else. It's a good job he enjoys the attention, and an even better job that his ego isn't made of glass.

What examples are there of him being held to a different standard?

This thread I guess.

Looking at the various videos and pics as far as I can see main question is around the good hold down and right of the big hold used to make the finishing moves.

From the top:

- Andy Earl, doesn't use it at all according to Steve and the photos show him on the left of the big hold
- Dan, uses it with his right after getting the big hold , probably just for a bit of assistance, doesn't look like it was essential though he does go back to down to it before completing finish (ground up I think)
- Will, goes to the hold with his right and actually chalks up on it before getting the big hold with his left
- Franco, does some tech up the wall with lh on the prow holds and rh pinkie(?) in a mono on left to get the hold with his left, then swaps to his rh and chalks up as per Will before finishing as everyone else. 

Franco seems to get a lot of negativity on here for using a sequence to the right to get to the extra hold compared to no questions at all for Will (definitely using the extra hold) and Dan (using the extra hold a bit). 

Would be interesting to know how hard his sequence is - is it significantly easier or just more tech and less powerful.

[ali k]

if I wasn’t staying on the overhanging side I’d be questioning whether I’d done it.

And Andy stuck more to the overhanging side than Dan, Ned and Will. Does that mean they haven't done it?

Seems obvious what Andy envisaged as a line when he did this route/problem. If Dan, Ned and Will missed a hard move at the top by swinging round the arete instead then if that changes the grade I’d say they’ve not done it as per Andy’s line. Call it ‘Prow RH Finish’ or something.

If it doesn’t change the grade and is just a more logical finish then it’s the same problem IMO.

If Franco’s variation is different again and also easier then it’s another problem. Call it whatever he wants. If it’s the same grade then the description can just be changed to ‘can be climbed on the left or right’ as per lots of other guidebook descriptions. But Tom has already confirmed it’s easier than the overhanging line.

Just my opinion. It’s not like there’s so much rock in the UK we can’t afford to have a couple of variations on this particular lump of rock!

[Will Hunt]

this is mostly a concern that Franco has cheated his way to a tick he’s not worthy of?

That has always been the first and last concern that people have about Franco. As we've seen on this thread, he is consistently held to a different standard to everyone else. It's a good job he enjoys the attention, and an even better job that his ego isn't made of glass.

What examples are there of him being held to a different standard?

This thread I guess.

Indeed, plenty of examples on this thread. As I've mentioned, people don't climb Vicious Streak as it was first done, likewise Tender Homecoming. Whaleback is the same. I could go on. Using a different sequence, or features that previously hadn't been used, and not mentioning it or a change in grade (if necessary) is entirely standard practice which nobody ever calls out.

[andy_e]

Shades of this classic thread

Is that the origin of the "video of me not doing it" trope on UKB?

The only reason I come on here any more is to read Dan's paragraphs. Ace.

[Ged]

this is mostly a concern that Franco has cheated his way to a tick he’s not worthy of?

That has always been the first and last concern that people have about Franco. As we've seen on this thread, he is consistently held to a different standard to everyone else. It's a good job he enjoys the attention, and an even better job that his ego isn't made of glass.

What examples are there of him being held to a different standard?

This thread I guess.

Indeed, plenty of examples on this thread. As I've mentioned, people don't climb Vicious Streak as it was first done, likewise Tender Homecoming. Whaleback is the same. I could go on. Using a different sequence, or features that previously hadn't been used, and not mentioning it or a change in grade (if necessary) is entirely standard practice which nobody ever calls out.

Do those people publish a grandly titled video shot with a drone, and extensive Instagram post complete with sponsor references?

[Teaboy]

As we've seen on this thread, he is consistently held to a different standard to everyone else.

That’s horse shit.

[AMorris]

If Franco’s variation is different again and also easier then it’s another problem. Call it whatever he wants. If it’s the same grade then the description can just be changed to ‘can be climbed on the left or right’ as per lots of other guidebook descriptions. But Tom has already confirmed it’s easier than the overhanging line.

Just to add another devils advocate voice to this choir of devils, I don't think it is necessarily confirmed to be easier. What Tom said is that it was easier for them, but then again, Franco is very good at techy sandstone vert on monos, but not exactly a bouldering wad. I think it is fair to say that if you are a burly power mutant, the prow is probably a relatively easier prospect than knacking up some mono's on a wall. For all I know it could be a couple of grades easier, but this seems to be a thread celebrating pedantry, so...

[Will Hunt]

this is mostly a concern that Franco has cheated his way to a tick he’s not worthy of?

That has always been the first and last concern that people have about Franco. As we've seen on this thread, he is consistently held to a different standard to everyone else. It's a good job he enjoys the attention, and an even better job that his ego isn't made of glass.

What examples are there of him being held to a different standard?

This thread I guess.

Indeed, plenty of examples on this thread. As I've mentioned, people don't climb Vicious Streak as it was first done, likewise Tender Homecoming. Whaleback is the same. I could go on. Using a different sequence, or features that previously hadn't been used, and not mentioning it or a change in grade (if necessary) is entirely standard practice which nobody ever calls out.

Do those people publish a grandly titled video shot with a drone, and extensive Instagram post complete with sponsor references?

Quite often, yes (maybe not the drone though).

[Bradders]

this is mostly a concern that Franco has cheated his way to a tick he’s not worthy of?

That has always been the first and last concern that people have about Franco. As we've seen on this thread, he is consistently held to a different standard to everyone else. It's a good job he enjoys the attention, and an even better job that his ego isn't made of glass.

What examples are there of him being held to a different standard?

This thread I guess.

Indeed, plenty of examples on this thread. As I've mentioned, people don't climb Vicious Streak as it was first done, likewise Tender Homecoming. Whaleback is the same. I could go on. Using a different sequence, or features that previously hadn't been used, and not mentioning it or a change in grade (if necessary) is entirely standard practice which nobody ever calls out.

Agree with Teaboy. For one thing none of those are nationally significant and very rarely repeated problems.

Those are all poor examples too.

Vicious Streak was originally done by Steve Dunning compressing between the arete with right hand and holds in the overlap with left. However, most people simply cannot span between the holds. I have a 6'5" span and it was only just doable. As far as I know I'm the only person who's done it that way from the more recent ascents.

Mark Katz did it using the crescent shape hold with his left and the arete with his right, but this relied on a good pebble which has now broken, so that version of the problem is defunct. The majority of people are therefore doing the only possible sequence for them.

Tender Homecoming is now climbed via a harder but safer sequence, and with a boulder grade. Fair game, although maybe in hindsight Will Buck's 2nd(?) ascent should have been described as a 1st. This one has maybe passed us by.

Whaleback is broken and, if I may be so bold, was a bit illogically eliminate before it broke. Post break the eliminate version isn't possible, so what are people to do?

[abarro81]

Using a different sequence, or features that previously hadn't been used, and not mentioning it or a change in grade (if necessary) is entirely standard practice which nobody ever calls out.

You're being very moronic with this statement. I assume it's deliberate. It ignores the entire debate about when a new sequence to the side of an existing problem becomes a new line. Which is what the whole fuckin' thread is about.

[Bonjoy]

If he'd just called it Prowed Wall 7c or whatever there would have been a few 'nice one's (prob even from Carlisle) and that'd be that. But where's the fun in that! He's obviously a narcissist but at least he creates some entertainment (clearly does it on purpose and revels in it).

This whole thing looks confected to me. The backlash was so inevitable and so easily avoided you can only assume it's a deliberate stunt.

[36chambers]

  re: Tender Homecoming and Vicious Streak

NSFW  :

Mark Katz did it using the crescent shape hold with his left and the arete with his right, but this relied on a good pebble which has now broken, so that version of the problem is defunct.

I didn't know there was originally a pebble! From my quick play last year I still think it's possible.

Tender Homecoming is now climbed via a harder but safer sequence, and with a boulder grade. Fair game, although maybe in hindsight Will Buck's 2nd(?) ascent should have been described as a 1st. This one has maybe passed us by.

Tom De Gay did the second ascent and he climbed it on the left, but not as far left as Will!

So would that make, De Gay akin to Varian and Will akin to Franco??

De Gay @37:40


Will @2:30

[mrjonathanr]

Having watched Franco’s video, 2 thoughts:
1. What a brilliant route! Well done 
2. It’s a different route to Andy Earl’s on an adjacent line. Nothing wrong with that, so long as people don’t confuse the two. UK rock has its fair share of lines tight together anyway.

[Will Hunt]

Using a different sequence, or features that previously hadn't been used, and not mentioning it or a change in grade (if necessary) is entirely standard practice which nobody ever calls out.

You're being very moronic with this statement. I assume it's deliberate. It ignores the entire debate about when a new sequence to the side of an existing problem becomes a new line. Which is what the whole fuckin' thread is about.

I don't think so. What's being discussed is multi-faceted. I'm not saying that's what should happen, I'm saying that's what does happen and that it's wrong to apply different rules to one climber.

A summary of my various thoughts if it helps to clarify things:

When we develop new problems or when we describe existing problems, we should strive to make them as logical as possible because, in my view, logical non-eliminates make the best problems. Unless you're at an eliminates venue, we should generally climb lines, not prescribed sequences. If there are any features which are out then this should be obvious and logical.

At one end of the spectrum you have eliminates/variations where it might add some value to say "use only these specified holds/parts of the holds". With increasing stature, as bouldering approaches trad/soloing, there should be fewer rules. The idea of having highballs with rules about what's in/out is nonsensical to me. If you're having to force yourself into a harder sequence then that becomes illogical or at least escapable - for a highball this is to the detriment of the quality. If The Prow is made easier by pulling right onto the wall then that's a shame because it leaves you to draw the conclusion that Earl's original line was illogical/escapable, thus making it a poorer climb (in my view).

If someone climbs something (and whether it is nationally significant/rarely repeated is irrelevant) in a way that significantly deviates from the logical line/included features then they should either: a) say that it's a variant or eliminate or whatever and (if relevant) say what grade their thing is; or, in the case of variants/eliminates that aren't worthwhile or are illogical, go back around.

Applying these rules, I'd say that Franco ought to have put up his nice video and said that he'd climbed The Prow a slightly different way and suggested a different grade (or indicated it's the same grade), else say he's climbed a variant on The Prow. Not knowing much about how this feature climbs I can't really say which of those is the better option.

People who scold Franco for not doing the above should also be pointing out the inconsistencies in other people's reporting where they find it. If they don't then don't be surprised when you turn up to the crag (as I have) to find people saying they've done Crucifix Low Traverse when they've fallen off (yes, not matched and dropped off, FALLEN FUCKING OFF  ) before getting to Central Crack.

[Bradders]

If someone climbs something (and whether it is nationally significant/rarely repeated is irrelevant) in a way that significantly deviates from the logical line/included features then they should either: a) say that it's a variant or eliminate or whatever

He called it "The Prow"!! 

[abarro81]

So let me get this straight, you agree with the consensus of the thread in almost every way possible... but you don't see enough people calling out punters at your local crags for dodgy shit so you thought you'd extrapolate that to dodgy shit being "entirely standard practice which nobody ever calls out".  You're trolling right?? It's like saying you saw some punter at Stanage climb on wet rock with mud on his shoes and no-one told him off so nobody should tell anyone good off for posting a video about climbing wet rock in muddy shoes because that would be holding them to a different standard. Are you Boris' new PR guy?

[teestub]

Unless you're at an eliminates venue, we should generally climb lines, not prescribed sequences. If there are any features which are out then this should be obvious and logical.

By 'lines' here, I take it you're referring to a line of least resistance, rather than the line of a feature?

[Zods Beard]

I personally can't wait for him too complete the Earl triple crown by climbing a different line at a different crag and calling it 'Beastmakers smell of poo poo'.

Will - You are talking utter rubbish. Any climber who posts to social media has this level of scrutiny. Remember when half of Wales wanted to tar and feather Barrows for kneebarring the Cave to death?? Or check the thread on here when that youth (I forget sorry!) climbed Hubble with a kneepad.

And please don't bring rubbish Almscliff eliminates into a discussion. It helps nothing.

[Will Hunt]

So let me get this straight, you agree with the consensus of the thread in almost every way possible... but you don't see enough people calling out punters at your local crags for dodgy shit so you thought you'd extrapolate that to dodgy shit being "entirely standard practice which nobody ever calls out".

Yes. If you can be bothered to look at my other contributions to this thread you'll see that my view hasn't really changed, though I've now elaborated on it. The reason I got so cross about what I see as differing standards and argued that point is because Yetix specifically called me out as toxic in a discussion which I think has, at times, been toxic and hypocritical (I was just trying to explain, somewhat flippantly, that I think different rules apply to eliminates and highballs). I've cited other examples where people break "the rules" and don't get called out.

Stubbs, good question. You'd hope to find that the feature was also the line of least resistance, though where that unfortunately isn't the case then I'd say feature ought to give way to least resistance as the principle line.

[Bonjoy]

Unless you're at an eliminates venue, we should generally climb lines, not prescribed sequences. If there are any features which are out then this should be obvious and logical.

The idea that things are either eliminate or non elimninate is naive. Most climbs are somewhere on a spectrum of purity. The point along this spectrum at which we consider something eliminate is rather arbitrary in practice, and varies from climber to climber, and from crag to crag. The fact this is underacknowledged is part of why this sort of thread/argument exists. The idea that boulder problems which are to any extent eliminate only belong in special ghettos and you can wander at will on problems everywhere else is nonsense. Rock produces illogical and inconsistent challenges which we do our best to make consistent and logical by applying minimal and sensible rules where it makes things better. Bouldering would be very limited and a lot less interesting if we didn't.