[andy moles]

I don't disagree, but don't you think examples like the one you give are slightly at odds with the amount of significance that's given to the terms?

We use them as a way of describing in brief how 'good' an ascent is, and loosely speaking that works, but not always.

[abarro81]

I think the terms are like grades -  many people use them as a proxy for how "good" or "impressive" an ascent is, but they're inherently quite poor at that... So yeah, like you say, it only works loosely

[petejh]

Bit chicken and egg though isn’t it - as the terms (and the grades) used to describe the significance of an ascent would hold a heck of a lot more meaning if people just stopped fucking them up to suit their own agendas! Often the ‘not always’ are people knowingly bending the limits of fairly commonly-understood definitions to suit their needs, as is the case here. If the definition of ‘flash’ explicitly excluded pre-inspection on a rope there’d be less scope for misuse of the definition.

Also +1 for having to audibly declare: ‘FLASH!’ with at least two witnesses of good standing in the community present for it to count - postmasters/mistress, bank manager, solicitor, magistrate, forum owner etc.

[crimpinainteasy]

People are always gonna find a way to break the rules no matter how hard you try, so at the end of the day it comes down to climbing the routes by your own ethics.

You could ban rope inspection, friends giving detailed video spraydown, tickmarks and then someone would turn up to the crag with a pair of binoculars, stack 15 pads, fly a drone next to the problem, so they can see the crux holds "from the ground"

[Steve Crowe]

Doesn’t everyone use binoculars?

[ferret]

A flash can never encompass inspection from above. This cannot be difficult to comprehend as climbing starts at the bottom of the mountain.

Baffled.

Are we going to ban all photos/video taken from above, looking down from the top and adjacent hillsides etc. That would be consistent at least.

[Aussiegav]

Here’s some old footage of me flashing Punks in the Gym. I’ve put a editing filter on it to ensure the sequences & holds used remains anonymous for others who wish to Onsight or flash it.

[Fiend]

Was thinking about this yesterday (whilst abbing three times down a crag and studiously avoiding looking at any lines I might want to climb at some point).

We could just have the term "pre-inspected flash" which would cover any sort of un-practised personal inspection on a rope or other artificial mechanism, up to and including cleaning and chalking holds and checking gear, but without actually pulling on. This would cover a lot of post-ab-cleaning ascents of course, so quite a useful category. Different from "beta-flash" (which JP took to the logical limit with Muy Caliente ofc).

Okay so the term is a bit wordy (but not quite as wordy as 5 pages of ethical munching) but I think it covers it well. YES there will still be grey areas but they'll be getting increasingly minor so the subsequent nitpicking will have diminishing returns...

[MischaHY]

Was thinking about this yesterday (whilst abbing three times down a crag and studiously avoiding looking at any lines I might want to climb at some point).

We could just have the term "pre-inspected flash" which would cover any sort of un-practised personal inspection on a rope or other artificial mechanism, up to and including cleaning and chalking holds and checking gear, but without actually pulling on. This would cover a lot of post-ab-cleaning ascents of course, so quite a useful category. Different from "beta-flash" (which JP took to the logical limit with Muy Caliente ofc).

Okay so the term is a bit wordy (but not quite as wordy as 5 pages of ethical munching) but I think it covers it well. YES there will still be grey areas but they'll be getting increasingly minor so the subsequent nitpicking will have diminishing returns...

Yep I like this. :-)

[i_a_coops]

I've heard 'abseil-up' before for exactly this style, most commonly on things with abseil approaches eg Pembroke, Verdon.

[JamieG]

We could just have the term "pre-inspected flash"

How about 'splashed' i.e. flashed with inSPection of holds?

Fiend, I had you covered two pages ago, with a less wordy and more 'witty' phrase!

(Apparently this is my 1000 UKB post. I hope I didn't waste it! Also I don't know whether to be happy or slightly ashamed.)

[Fiend]

Sorry Jamie! In a shocking turn of events I hadn't actually read most of the thread, despite it being a topic I'm usually a fan of...

[NaoB]

Ab-solutely flashulous

[edshakey]

https://www.ukclimbing.com/news/2022/06/james_pearson_climbs_lexicon_e11_7a-73070

Including thoughts on what defines a flash

[ferret]

E11 with no top rope practice, impressive

[Nike Air]

(RE the other point, I've always thought ab inspection was pretty dodgy for a flash - to the point of not really being a flash... but not really being a headpoint. Kinda the same as onsighting/flashing multiple lines that share a significant section - sits in a grey area so whatever you call it, it will need an asterisk next to it)

Yes. Saying “flash attempt” without any qualifier is very misleading.

If abseil inspection is acceptable to claim a ‘flash’ in Pearson’s mind it would be worth checking for the record books (Remus?) whether he abbed down ‘Something’s Burning’ first in addition to the extensive beta he got off Ciavaldini.

As far as I remember he abbed somethings burning whilst Caro was on it (on a top rope or abb rope I can't quite recall) demonstrating the moves and the fiddly gear placements.

[Nemo]

Can't believe there's 5 pages discussing this.
If you've abbed it, you're headpointing.  There really isn't anything to discuss.

Yes, boulderers define flash differently to sport / trad climbers.  ie: for routes, it's always been ground up, first go (usually in UK trad climbing allowing returning to the ground without weighting gear as part of the first go).  For bouldering first go without pulling on prior (which allows fondling holds).

And yes, the words we use to describe style are hugely overlapping segments of a continuous spectrum.
So it's easily possible that a great style headpoint can be better style than a poor style flash.
(Think abbing down a line that hasn't been climbed for years and brushing the lichen off a few holds and then headpointing first try, vs having watched dozens of people climb a route and dozens of videos, full beta on every gear placement, the route fully chalked up and then flashing it).

In general though, abbing something - feeling the holds, checking the gear placements, being on the wall knowing what you're in for, makes all the difference in the world.  Often far more than any amount of videos or watching someone else on it can make.  Abbing something in combination with lots of beta really makes it a fair way down the headpointing segment of the style spectrum, let alone a flash.

You might feel grumpy that your ascent is only a headpoint when it was actually a really good style ascent.
But doesn't mean you can just redefine the words that everyone else has used just fine for decades.
Just means that they are only very loose guidelines as to the style of the ascent, and if you want someone to realise it was a good style headpoint, then give some more details.

Anyways - someone should go and report a solo ascent.  Having done it on a shunt and redefined solo to mean they were the only person at the crag. 

[andy moles]

And yes, the words we use to describe style are hugely overlapping segments of a continuous spectrum.

I think all your points are reasonable, but this isn't quite right. There's nothing continuous about it. It's a pretty lumpy spectrum.

[haydn jones]

Can't believe there's 5 pages discussing this.
If you've abbed it, you're headpointing.  There really isn't anything to discuss.
 

I think the reason there is 4 pages is that's not true. I 100% disagree. I think you should be able to abb a line and brush the holds with chalk and look at all the gear placements and still call it a flash. I even thought that touching holds is fine

[edshakey]

Can't believe there's 5 pages discussing this.

And yet it still took you 4 paragraphs to explain the apparently undebatable truth. Hardly cut-and-dried.

[Stabbsy]

Doesn’t everyone use binoculars?

I remember doing this on a route in the Lakes once. Saw this decent pair of holds to aim for at the end of a spicy runout. Turns out binoculars magnify things - who knew? What followed is indelibly imprinted on my memory!

[Fiend]

Can't believe there's 5 pages discussing this.

And yet it still took you 4 paragraphs to explain the apparently undebatable truth.

[Wellsy]

Not that I'm a trad climber at all, but I've heard it said that headpointing is generally considered much more acceptable at the higher end of the grading scale/one's personal limit, like if you can say climb E3 you should really not be headpointing HVS, but it's okay for E2/E3.

Could it be similar with the ethics of a flash? Like if Pearson was on an E5 or E6 we'd expect his flash to not include an ab, but as it's E10 at least, he's allowed to inspect it first and it still counts? I.e what I acceptable for a flash differs for the seriousness of the route in both general and personal terms.

[NaoB]

This is so interesting! There are all these well established climbers who 100% think their interpretation of the terms of style are correct, and yet their views are different. Who is the arbiter of this debate, the highest source of wisdom??

I generally took On The Edge to be the font of all knowledge when I was learning the ropes. For all these years, I've understood the flash category (in the UK, not anywhere else like Verdon) to describe climbing something first go where you have more information than what you can see of the holds just with your own eyes (and the guidebook description). There is the subset of the 'beta flash', which means of course that there are other types of flash possible. I'd always thought that the line not to cross was pulling on the holds. So abbing down and feeling the positions would not be ok, but brushing and touching the holds would.

Having said that, I usually would only have chosen that method if it was an unloved route that needed debris brushing off or some such. And it would need to be specified if boasting about it later!

I'm willing to accept that my understanding is wrong, but I'm just saying that's what myself and many others have understood a flash to encompass for all these years.

[SA Chris]

Doesn’t everyone use binoculars?

I remember doing this on a route in the Lakes once. Saw this decent pair of holds to aim for at the end of a spicy runout. Turns out binoculars magnify things - who knew? What followed is indelibly imprinted on my memory!

I've done that looking for potentially climbable boulders. A couple of miles of heather bashing to find it's waist height is also imprinted.