[dave]

To climb an english 7a move would require more power/strength/fingers than a 6c move. So even though 10 6c moves on the trot may be doable by a  person they may not be able to do a 7a move.

true they might not, but more than likley they would be able to.  if someone has the capacity to do 10 6c moves on the trot then it stands to reason that 6c cannot then be their theoretical maximum. if it was then they'd be all on doing 1 6c moves or 2 on the trot. thus thier maximum lies higher - 7a.

you could of course argue that there could be someone who could reach their maximum and be able to do loads of thier maximum moves on the trot without being able to climb harder, but as far as know people just don't work like that. typically Mr XXX who can do a 10-move font8b can also do a  1-move font 8b.

[Bonjoy]

Grades are arbitary lines in the sand, basically a chosen threshold on a sliding scale of difficulty. So back in the day some people did some moves which were and are harder than the moves that had predated them, so they drew the line in the sand there and called it 7a. After the event for what ever reason other peole repeatedly pushed this line further and further up the difficulty scale. It's entirely a matter of personal opinion but I think the original dividing point was better placed. 6c is undoubtedly a very broad grade, due to grade compression (even on one move only prob it can be anything from V5-V10 according to some deffinitions) and 7a an almost mythical  entity.

[IanP]

I'm not sure how much I can contribute to this since I sport climb more than boulder these days and never bouldered that hard anyway (a few V7's one V8) but I can see where people like Andy H are coming from.  To me the harder problems I've done usually felt more like moving from one 6b into another 6b rather than a distinctly harder move.  I therefore would think real 6c starts somewhere around V7 / V8 which means that 7a would starting around V10 say and 7b somewhere up in the distance.  

In the end does the idea of trying to define difficulty down to an individual move start to become a bit meaningless as the move get harder.  Didn't someone above say Blind Date is a 7a sequence - if it's a sequence then its not a single move!  Thats why we use V or Font grades isn't it.

[Buoux 8C]

Just read through the topic and it a pretty interesting read.

Regarding what dave and Andy have been saying about moves on the trot etc etc, i reckon that it is definetly possible to be able to do moves of 90% or more of someones maximun power several times on the trot. My main strength in climbing is being able to do this, whilst my total maxmiun power is not that great i have the capability to be able to climb at 90/95% of my maximun for anything between 5 and 20 moves so long as my skin doesnt start weeping with sweat.
It obviously relies on the person, but a climber who climbs routes at a high level will certainly be good at this type of climbing. On the other hand you have people that can only climb around 65% of their maxmiun when a problem is more than a few moves, this however i feel is a lame excuse for people who are generally weak so blame their weakness on lack of fitness, rather than trying to improve their climbing or stength.

regarding this english 7a thing, i think their are two different ideas that are related to this, i have been on/ done grit routes that have been giving english 7a and to be honest they where a joke, and probably wouldnt warrant any harder than 6b if they where in bouldering or on a sport route, but people in the know assured me that they where confirmed 7a routes. The other end of the spectrum is if you compare harder (cutting edge) routes/problems to those of a mere average hardness, for example, if i was comparing west side story with one of these english 7a grit routes then yes it would be certainly english 7a, however if i was to compare west side story with something like superman or one of the hard problems in the school then it would probably be 6b in comparision. So it bascially comes down to what level you are actually at, someone like Andy harris who has tried stuff like Hubble, and the hard problems in the school etc etc would feel that west sdie story is not 7a and that 7a is horrendussly hard, where as someone that is comparing english 7a with grit 7a routes or other problems that certain people think are 7a such as blind date etc etc probably would agree that west side story etc, is english 7a.

I personally agree with Andy english 7a is very very hard, and stuff like west side story cannot be compared with the diffiucly as stuff like superman, hubble etc etc.
And as for english 7b, this in my eyes is near impossible (although still possible), if you try the 7a's or font 8a+ problems in the school, you would defiently agree with me.

Also someone who said that if west sdide story or blind date where on a route they would nearly be impossible is also having a laugh, go out to spain try one of their hard sport routes, when you dog to the top of 30 metres of hard 8c/8c+ climbing and find a boulder problem way way harder than west side story or blind date up their, then you would probably change your mind.

Hope all that makes sense

[webbo]

the way this discussion is going i do'nt reckon it will be long before someone say's there is no such thing as english 6c  just several 6b moves

[dave]

what you say makes some sense rich, but in saying theres an argument for 7a being where you say at the cutting edge, and thus WSS/blinddate 6b like you say,, this then has the knock-on effect of making almost 80 years of climbing grading wrong. If john allen was 2 grades out in gradeing 7a, then all those things that he graded WSS relative to are also wrong, and so on and so on.

Don't want to be harsh but i trust 80 years of climbing history and evolution and grade reconding done by 10000s of climbers over the years over your arguement. Ok what you say may make some sense and work in the top level, but if its going against all that we take to be consensus then it don't sound like a possibilty.

Just for interest how do you recon the "width" of the 7a and 6a grades compare?

[cofe]

reckon people keep knocking how good they are. Buoux has obviously delivered the goods like fed ex all over the joint, liquid amber being perfect example. love yourself more rich. imagine how easy you must find 6a and 6b. hence the argument for the grade boundaries so you must have doe eng 7b moves. dave has apparently done some hard shit as well though not muich has been videoed so i don't believe him.

too many unnecessary arguments to be had.

Back to original question. 7a?

SHIRLEY'S SHINING TEMPLE. (shirley you can't be serious? i am, and don't call me shirley).

[Buoux 8C]

Aye i agree what you say Dave, its a similar scenario to bristish grades compared to the grades overseas, basically from a cutting edge point of vies english 7a is very hard, then the other point of view is that english 7a is actually ok, its just deciding which one is right, some think english 7a is hard others not so hard, i dont think anyones wrong, their jsut entitled to their own opinion and alot fo that is down to how they actually view climbing and what type of climibng they are into.

Its just so simialr to British/overseas grades, they are fairly different, overseas is genralyy aceepted as being easier for the grade than some of our clasic problems over here, is one overgraded or ungdergraded? no one knows, everyone has their own opinion, to be honest it dosent really matter, so long as evertyone is honest about it.

Could be another topic? world grading? i personally think that british grades arnt any hard than most eupropean grades, ye for sure their are some things that are pretty touch in comparison, (usually classic problems done in early 90's by6 Moon and co) But their are also some pretty hard stuff in europe for the grades that make some of our stuff feel like walkovers.

[dave]

so how do our hard limestone problems like at in peak, cragx, rubicon etc compare to that hard stuff over in europe like the frankendurex?

[webbo]

it took years for 6b to be accepted as a grade[profit of doom in recent developments]now aday's no one bat's an eyelid if it's used,the same with 6c.i suspect that in another few years time when boulder problems are included in the mainstream guide book's i.e.the roaches 7a will be common place.

[Johnny Brown]

I personally agree with Andy english 7a is very very hard

Hmm, a few thoughts.

The main problem I can see is some of the top climbers want to keep 7a as the living end. Its not, its over twenty years old. Bear in mind the first guys that established the grade (John Allen, Rob Gawthorpe etc) are the ones whose problems now fall in to the 7b+/7c+ range I mentioned above.

The problem came later when people refused to give harder problems 7b. Others then came along, did the later problems and took them as the benchmark. This produced so much confusion that it led to nothing less than led to the abandonment of UK tech grades as a usable concept. Now we sit here arguing whether font or v grades are best and what french grade gaia would be. I fall into the trap as much as anyone that being better makes my opinion carry more weight. With uk tech grades it has caused a dead end.

The comparison of WSS to some spanish 8c+ makes no sense to me - I would expect there to be lots of harder moves on an 8c+? Even so I have watched a lot of very strong (french especially) climbers flounder on westside, and to my knowledge it has only been flashed once. Its twenty years old! This despite all the video beta that supposedly makes flashing the harder Brad pit not so impressive. The reason is - WSS is technically hard, once you have worked that technique out, it feels easier. If we graded only for the full beta-flash, it would be harder than many harder-graded problems, non?

Does no one remember Malcolm talking about Uk 7c and 8a? Seems totally ridiculous now, but he had developed his scale more or less in isolation, using established problems as the benchmark. If we follow Rich and Andy's opinion that those of us who haven't done superman don't understand hard climbing, then I think Malcolm's opinion trumps them.

I came up through the grades more or less in isolation from 'the scene', mainly climbing on grit, and the grade progression made perfect sense. I'd done a lot of 6c's before I managed my first 7a, and a lot of 7a's before I started to edge into 7b. Only then did I start to encounter cliques of good climbers (usually the 'in' crowd) who thought 7a didn't exist cos someone stronger than them said superman was just sustained 6c. It's all become part of the british scene - claiming big numbers makes you look conceited, so stick to down-grading everything else.

I think if you get so strong that footholds often cease to matter, you may lose perspective on grades that are established expecting people to have to use their feet. Or should everything be graded assuming everyone can one arm a razor crimp? It's often the easiest sequence...

As Cofe suggested, Rich and Andy should go try Shirley's, or Angel's share. They should feel very easy, after all the guys who did them were weak as piss. I find it very confusing when 8c climbers struggle on 6a rockovers. Are they actually shit climbers, or is the rockover really hard?????

Lastly, could AndyH and Andy Harris differentiate themselves please? It's very confusing...

[dave]

one other thing worth considering is if tech grades are as wide as some people seem to be suggesting, then that would mean that walking up stairs would be about 5c, and crawling along the floor is 5a.

[Pantontino]

"As a young lad inspired by Ben Moon on Agincourt and tales of power for me the hardest moves were where it was at. Just think would you prefer to do 1 7c move or 10*7a together. I know what the pure boulderer would say."

Trouble is Andy, there are lots of different ways of going bouldering, not just these days, always has been.

I enjoy long problems, but that is (as I'm sure you'll point out) because I'm weak. Trouble is, there are plenty of very strong climbers who also like to do long problems, where the sequence matters more than the move.

Maybe us 'ramblers' should go back to doing routes, eh?

I do agree with some of what you say though:

I can remember the buzz of doing the Keel for the first time and thinking to myself that I might have done a 7a move (this was in the early 90s, pre snazzy beta era, when people actually considered it to be hard, rather than some tricky V8).

I now know this is bollocks, there are no 7a moves on it at all.

One other thought:

Despite the hegemony of V/Font grades, I still think in terms of Brit tech grades when I'm breaking down a sequence in my head.

[Buoux 8C]

As Cofe suggested, Rich and Andy should go try Shirley's, or Angel's share. They should feel very easy, after all the guys who did them were weak as piss. I find it very confusing when 8c climbers struggle on 6a rockovers. Are they actually shit climbers, or is the rockover really hard?????

Sorry mate but are you really that sure that neither of us have done one of or both of them routes, and not found them pretty easy? About 6a rockovers, i presume you mean the one in the runnel to get established onto the slab for angel share/velvet silence, i was fairly sure that this move was considered english 6c for the route?
Just remember that just becasue cutting edge climbers tend themselves to more powerful testpieces dosent mean that their basic climbing ability is still greater than most peoples.

and regarding the Wss/route scenario, i was replying to whoever said (cant remember who posted it) that if Wss or Blind date where on routes, the route would be nearly impossible.

came up through the grades more or less in isolation from 'the scene', mainly climbing on grit, and the grade progression made perfect sense. I'd done a lot of 6c's before I managed my first 7a, and a lot of 7a's before I started to edge into 7b

Out of interets what 7b moves have you done, and on what problem/route?

[Nigel]

Personally reckon Rich has hit the nail on the head - basically we have to decide whether 7a is either a)OK, or b)the living end.

Looked at impartially, JB has to be right, 7a has to be OK for it to mean anything. Otherwise English tech grades are meaningless - i.e. my hardest is 7a, and so is Gaskins'. Yeah right!

Theoretically.  :roll:

[Pantontino]

"Whatever. You are just talking about power. I could equally argue the only truly hard moves must be on slabs. Otherwise it's just a question of how strong you are, not how difficult the climbing is. If all that interested me was power, then I'd be a weightlifter."

JB your insinuation that the angle of the rock dictates technicality/difficulty is bogus.

Both slab problems and steep problems can yield exceptionally technical movement, and if you are climbing at your limit, everything becomes incredibly technical, even allegedly basic power locks can be turned into tricky, technical deadpoints by weak climbers.

[dave]

Personally reckon Rich has hit the nail on the head - basically we have to decide whether 7a is either a)OK, or b)the living end.

Looked at impartially, JB has to be right, 7a has to be OK for it to mean anything. Otherwise English tech grades are meaningless - i.e. my hardest is 7a, and so is Gaskins'. Yeah right!

Theoretically.  :roll:

i agree - 7a is alright. If its the living end then every route done in the last 100years needs regrading, which is bollocks.

[Tim Heaton]

I really don't understand why some people seem to insist on grading everything from the top down i.e. the hardest thing must be 7a and just working our way down from there so we downgrade WSS and Blind Date just because there are now things harder - it's just totally the wrong way around to think about it. By implication that would mean that whenever anything harder came along we would have to regrade every other problem downwards, resulting in a fairly crap system a la original American B0/1/2/3 grades.

Surely that is not the way grades work, they should go upwards as peoples standards improve. When the first people graded something 7a they did so because they felt it was considerably harder than 6c, in exactly the same way as the first people to grade something 5c when the previous hardest grade was 5b. Then as standards improve the bouldering grade can go up again to 7b e.t.c. . It is not for us to say that what was accepted at the time as 7a is, now that we are stronger and can climb harder things, only 6c - that is surely the definition of the grade and was fixed at its time of conception and general acceptance. If you do a move that is considerably harder, then it is quite possibly 7b.

In summary I really don't understand why we must have 7a as the hardest grade do-able move,  why can't we just accept the traditional 7a's (routes and boulder problems) as benchmarks and so now we have at least 7b, possibly 7c.

[Johnny Brown]

Sorry mate but are you really that sure that neither of us have done one of or both of them routes, and not found them pretty easy?

Yep. I'd love to be proved wrong though.

About 6a rockovers, i presume you mean the one in the runnel to get established onto the slab for angel share/velvet silence, i was fairly sure that this move was considered english 6c for the route?

No, no don't know where you got that idea, I was talking about a recent experience with a mate. I'm sure I there's no need to embarrass the guy by naming him. But as you bring it up, I'd say that move was 6b. All three routes have harder sections higher up.

Just remember that just becasue cutting edge climbers tend themselves to more powerful testpieces dosent mean that their basic climbing ability is still greater than most peoples.

Not sure what you mean? Actually reads that cutting edge climbers are no better technically, but i don't think that's what you meant.

and regarding the Wss/route scenario, i was replying to whoever said (cant remember who posted it) that if Wss or Blind date where on routes, the route would be nearly impossible.

I didn't say impossible though, and what I meant was in the context of british grades rather than spanish sport routes. What I meant was, you're on a trad E5 or E6 6c, and you're expected to do either of those, you might think 7a a fairer tech grade.

Which brings me to the other point... I was talking about this in the pub after bouldering today, and was lambasted (by an almscliffe local) for claiming 7a or 7b existed. Pushed on the trad point, he conceded 'well obviously trad tech grades are different', and lost the argument. If you want to claim there are two scales of uk tech grades then fine, you're welcome to them.

Out of interets what 7b moves have you done, and on what problem/route?

Obviously by your scale, none, as they don't exist. By mine, a couple, i.e they felt a grade harder than what I consider 7a. As I said above, I think 7a translates broadly to font 7b+ - 7c+, and anything of font 8a and above is getting into 7b territory. Font 8c might translate to 'easy' 7c, but I haven't done any.:wink: Obviously stam plod don't count.

JB your insinuation that the angle of the rock dictates technicality/difficulty is bogus

That's not what I meant. What I mean is, is doing 1-4-7 on the small rungs technically much harder than the big rungs? Or is it mainly a case of needing to be much stronger?

[Buoux 8C]

That's not what I meant. What I mean is, is doing 1-4-7 on the small rungs technically much harder than the big rungs? Or is it mainly a case of needing to be much stronger?

Is being able to use explosive power not a technique in its own right? the same could be said is climbing a slab with small holds techniqually any harder than climbing a slab with big holds? or are just stronger fingers and toes required?
Technique plays a massive part of any climbing move, even sometimes if it dosent feel like it does, whether the move is on steep rock, a slab or anywhere in between, their will always be a certain technique required.

Yep. I'd love to be proved wrong though.

I really dont understand how you can say this, as far as i am aware i have never met  you or climbed with you, how are you so sure that i havent climbed any of them routes? Just because you havent heard anything dosent mean automatically that i havent. I Know i mainly clip bolts but i have done a far bit of trad, even recently in the last few weeks i have been climbing trad or soloing, so dont be so certain. If i ever meet you and you asked me, id tell you but until then you will have to wait to find out.
Anyway dosent really matter to me either way what english 7a is, good debate to kill some time though

[Bubba]

<offtopic>

re: WSS

and to my knowledge it has only been flashed once.

Who was that JB ?

Lastly, could AndyH and Andy Harris differentiate themselves please? It's very confusing...

Yeah, the "andyh" and "andy h" usernames are very confusing - if either of you would like to swap to something different it can be done very easily and you keep all your existing posts, etc.

</offtopic>

[Nigel]

...is climbing a slab with small holds techniqually any harder than climbing a slab with big holds? or are just stronger fingers and toes required?

Good question! JB?

[Johnny Brown]

I really dont understand how you can say this, as far as i am aware i have never met you or climbed with you, how are you so sure that i havent climbed any of them routes?

The routes, despite being old, are still hard and rarely repeated; hence news tends to travel. The climbing scene is still small enough for such chinese whispers not to have to make too many jumps. Just as you would probably get to hear if I did Superman.

Who was that JB ?

Matt Birch, so they say. I'm sure he'd be the first to deny it was 7a though!

Is being able to use explosive power not a technique in its own right?

Absolutely! In fact there's loads of technique in campussing, using swing as momentum etc. But it will only take you so far. As Spoon said, 'in the end it comes down to how hard you can pull.'

the same could be said is climbing a slab with small holds techniqually any harder than climbing a slab with big holds? or are just stronger fingers and toes required?

Good question. Now considering fingers won't be much use on the crux of angel's share, you could argue it's all about toe strength. But it's not is it? We all walk around all day, so our feet muscles develop in proportion to our body weight. You just don't get the massive variations in power-to-weight ratios like in finger strength. Anyone could make their boot stick to one of the angel's smears in isolation, but they couldn't hang any hold on hubble. So we get a 'level playing field' where technique is far more important than strength.

All I think is that strength will get you further, faster on steep ground than technique will, and on slabs the reverse is true. All my experience, both of climbing myself and watching others, has borne that out. I don't see why that is contentious to be honest :shock:

So we agree to differ on 7b - I've climbed it and you haven't :wink:  :D

[Nigel]

Come on then Johnny, lets move it along. What 7b's have you done, I want to be a 7b climber too!  :

[Ru]

The UK grade may well be called a 'technical grade' but it is really just a measure of absolute difficulty, not one of complexity of movement. Strength requirements are built in to the grade, because it is more difficult to do a move that requires more strength, not necessarily for the individual, but for the population. A grade is, afterall, meaningless if it only applies to one person.

Many people have already sussed the nub of the issue - it is necessary to decide how hard 7a is - is it the living end, or just a notch harder than the average 6c? With pretty much all hard climbers ignoring UK tech grades, with no real reason why they should start using them again, it is likely that the issue will never be resolved.

Me, I'd bin UK tech grades completely. They do nothing that font grades don't do better.