Grit route/highball Last Great Problems.... (Read 82740 times)

irish si · October 24, 2006, 05:27:59 pm

Bungle be careful not to be disrespectful. You do know who the true notorious BLG is i presume. I was under the impression that he was as infamous as colorado bouldering grades.

Doylo · October 26, 2006, 08:22:52 pm

Quote from: irish si on October 24, 2006, 05:27:59 pm

Bungle be careful not to be disrespectful. You do know who the true notorious BLG is i presume. I was under the impression that he was as infamous as colorado bouldering grades.

Not even the great BLG is that infamous!

Andy F · October 26, 2006, 10:58:11 pm

To get this thread back on track, The Midas Touch on the Golden Tower, Anglezarke needs tidying up by soloing, without resorting to side runners (like wot I lead it with). Probably E7 6c for the solo.

Will Hunt · November 09, 2006, 11:29:00 pm

Correct me if Im wrong but...

Surely its poor form to describe things as the "last great problems". Ive heard this term bandied around a lot and it seems to me that there are always going to be new great problems as the standard of climbing gets better. In t' olden days (I may be wrong but I think I saw this on Hard Grit) they were describing what is now E3 or thereabouts as the last great problems. What if some genius develops a new form of protection that simply sticks to flat rock as opposed to having to be placed in breaks/cracks etc. Unethical sounding and I dont know how it would work (not a scientist) but this would make just about anything other than rough, weak or uneven rock protectable. And as people train harder and harder or stickier rubber is invented then people might start climbing much much harder.

Anyway, all Im saying is that there are a seemingly infintessimal amount of "great" lines and problems to be done. In the 1900's who would have thought that Rhapsody would have been possible. In the 1700's who wouldnt have laughed at someone who said that one day humans would fly around in metal tubes. The standard of climbing has not yet reached is peak and with new technological advantages Im taking a Bosrupian view on the future of climbing.

Sorry if I just spouted bullshit.

Teaboy · November 09, 2006, 11:53:45 pm

Quote

Anyway, all Im saying is that there are a seemingly infintessimal amount of "great" lines and problems to be done.

So name one and you will have made a reasonable contribution to this thread, otherwise you are, as you say, just spouting shite

Bonjoy · November 10, 2006, 09:14:15 am

Will Hunt - Your simplistic vision of the future is missing a crucial point. Progress in difficulty is not linear over time. Progress is constrained within the bounds of physics. Take dynos as a simplified example. Over the years the distance people can dyno has increased, but the increase gets ever smaller as we approach the boundry of physical possibility. It is simplistic to assume that we will be making 10 metre dynos by 2100. The only way this can happen is for one of the immutables to change eg gravity, human physiology. Short of genetic/cybernetic engineering we will continue to make infinitesimal (BTW this means imeasurably tiny and tending toward zero, not infinate) gains in height, these will be ever more small and hard to acheive. The other major limiting factor then comes into play. When the difference between the worlds biggest dyno and the point beyond which any human can dyno gets so small it is measured in millimetres, how many of these are you likely to find on real rock? 99.9999...% of the dynos you find will be either side of this advancement range. It is a fact that the harder standards become the harder it becomes to find sufficiently hard lines on rock which aren't plain impossible. I'm not saying we have reached a point where standards can't improve (in fact I believe this point is unreachable), grades will increase because the closer to impossible you get the more extra difficulty will arise from a given unit of change in the perameters of the climb i.e. each extra millimeter dynoed is exponentially harder than the last. Basically it will be possible to squeeze quite a few grade rises out of small changes in the rock geometry. But crucially it will get to a point where it is nigh on impossible to find the next step forward on the random medium of rock. Ultimately the only way to make the next step forward will be on artificially produced problems, be they on rock or climbing wall.

AndiT · November 10, 2006, 10:31:16 am

I think I need a lie down after that Jon ???

grimer · November 10, 2006, 10:31:59 am

Agree Bonjoy. It says something when the Cratcliffe groove, essentially about seven feet of climbing, is regarded as a last great problem.

Andy F · November 10, 2006, 10:38:35 am

I think I need some ibruprofen after that...

Bonjoy · November 10, 2006, 10:42:14 am

One bunch of bullshit deserves another.

unclesomebody · November 10, 2006, 10:44:16 am

Bullshit? I thought your post made absolute sense bonjoy. But maybe I would....

Bonjoy · November 10, 2006, 10:58:11 am

Glad it made sense to someone. Got lost a bit at the end, so have edited for clarity

Andy F · November 10, 2006, 11:01:45 am

It made sense, it just, well, hurt a bit reading it

Fiend · November 10, 2006, 04:10:59 pm

Quote from: Bonjoy on November 10, 2006, 10:58:11 am

Progress in difficulty is not linear over time.

That says it all really.

cofe · November 10, 2006, 06:51:28 pm

i only read the bit in italics at the end which says 'bonjoy; reason; clarity' - is that your purpose statement?

Bonjoy · November 10, 2006, 06:53:54 pm

Raison d'etre, please

Aussiegav · November 10, 2006, 08:20:52 pm

the smiley wall at curbar???
the arch thingy at slipstones??

Will Hunt · November 10, 2006, 08:34:30 pm

Bonjoy makes a fair point and of course humans cannot dyno increasingly high because we're not evolved for it and the ever present tyrant of gravity is holding us back. Of course if evolution decided that the climbers that could dyno the highest were "the fittest" and all the chicks started clamouring over Owen "that lanky guy from l'pool who only ever boulders who did the 7ft dyno" then we might be able to dyno higher.
That said the way I see it is that Bonjoy was agreeing with me in a way. i didnt mean that climbers could become infinately amazing because this would involve something daft like being able to climb a 90 degrees piece of perfectly plane rock. i just meant there was still a long way to go and perhaps its not right to refer to things as the "last" great problems. To my inexperienced little ears this makes it sound like your going to climb all the "last" great problems and then say "sack it, we've done all the great problems lets stick to 6a from now on".

I still think that there are plenty of advances still to be made technologically though even if evolution cant keep up and with stickier rubber and better protection then todays "last great problems" might become tomorrows punter grades (exaggerated I know but you catch my drift. Or do you?)

Once again. Apologies for crapness.

enigma · November 11, 2006, 05:11:13 am

i've actually top roped the arete at montcliffe and its never E7, it'd be a decent E6/6a, don't all rush at once. I did the wall to the left, can't remember name or grade.

andy_e · November 11, 2006, 08:31:43 pm

I think it's E4, did you try the slopey wierd arete or the wall to the left of said arete?

enigma · November 12, 2006, 06:54:07 pm

I must have been drunk when i wrote that because i can't really remember doing so. i've roped the arete and led the wall, which i called you've got to fight for your riots to work, not sure what i gave it but its recorded in the online lancashire new routes guide.

andy_e · November 12, 2006, 07:00:10 pm

You gave it E4/5 6a/b apparently... Looks good anyway.

fatdoc · November 12, 2006, 09:34:53 pm

pardon my ignorance and lack of guidebook purchase here:

hasnt the smiley wall (the short wall with the big smile feature) been done yet??

it was in a video yrs ago - Ben Moon top roping it - and had been tried by many.... just thought those of you good enough would have done it by now.....

i tried it about 12 yrs ago, and it was nails..... but I was just about headpinting (sic) E6 at the time!! I think it's even got gear....

r-man · November 12, 2006, 10:19:19 pm

Quote from: enigma on November 11, 2006, 05:11:13 am

i've actually top roped the arete at montcliffe and its never E7, it'd be a decent E6/6a, don't all rush at once. I did the wall to the left, can't remember name or grade.

Yes, the striking sharp arete, I remember clm telling me. This is a proper route though, whereas the obvious highball at montcliffe is the rounded arete to the right. Much harder. Also difficult to get it in condition as it doesn't dry off much in winter, and in summer it's too hot. Not that I've had a proper go, though I know people who have.

unclesomebody · November 12, 2006, 10:20:46 pm

Quote from: fatdoc on November 12, 2006, 09:34:53 pm

pardon my ignorance and lack of guidebook purchase here:

hasnt the smiley wall (the short wall with the big smile feature) been done yet??

it was in a video yrs ago - Ben Moon top roping it - and had been tried by many.... just thought those of you good enough would have done it by now.....

i tried it about 12 yrs ago, and it was nails..... but I was just about headpinting (sic) E6 at the time!! I think it's even got gear....

It's very hard, it's been top roped in one, it has a bad landing, the gear wouldn't stop you hitting the ground.