[Alan James, Rockfax]

I am looking for bouldering grades for some of the short routes on Birchen Edge that have traditionally been given E-grades but are probably better described as boulder problems nowadays.

The main three are :

Technical Genius - E1 6c
Low problem on Emma's Slab.

Gritstone Megamix - E3 6c
The direct start the Chain on The Promenade.

Hornblower - E1 6b
Direct to Powder Monkey Parade

Any suggestions for V-grades, or Font grades for these?

Any other routes on Birchen that are treated as boulder problems?

Thanks

Alan

[Palomides]

<innocently>

Sorry Alan, I've no idea   

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Add to the list

The Brigand at Birchen

and Desperot at Chatsworth

Anybody care to suggest grades for these?

Thanks

[Fiend]

If you wait a bit for the new BMC Chatsworth guide, I'm sure they'll have them all covered with V-grades as they're doing these days 

[Alan James, Rockfax]

If you wait a bit for the new BMC Chatsworth guide,

.... and how will the BMC find out their bouldering grades?

[(woz)]

My opinion:

Technical Genius - font 7a/V6

Hornblower - font 7a/V6

Sorry, but these are the only two that I've done

[Johnny Brown]

.... and how will the BMC find out their bouldering grades?

The writers or their friends will go and do them? Crikey, I thought that was how guides were written!

[r-man]

Oh please don't start this boring argument again. Whatever issues people may have with Rockfax, this is a forum for talking about bouldering... And I for one would certainly be interested to know what boulder problems there are at Birchen, how hard they are, and how good they are. Didn't know there was much worth doing. So if people would kindly share their knowledge, I'd be grateful.

 

[Johnny Brown]

Actually several of us were involved with checking exactly this subject a few months ago for the next BMC guide. Having put in personal time and effort to make sure of the facts, you can understand our reluctance in just handing over the information to 'the competition'.

I'm sure the info is available somewhere if both of you look hard enough.

[Alan James, Rockfax]

I happen not to be able to boulder the routes at Birchen in question. I have nearly done one of them but I am nowhere near the others. However I don't rely on my single opinion for Hornblower (the one I have nearly done) since that would be stupid - one person's opinion is extremely unreliable. So I have sent emails to my bouldering friends who I think may have done them, and I am asking publicly on a bouldering forum, and on UKC, to try and see what other people think so that I can build up a consensus opinion.

You may have noticed that Rockfax publish all our grades online so that people can give feedback on them, something which those who work on BMC guides have told me many times they find an extremely useful resource. We try, and often succeed, in doing this before publication and then update them after publication based on the feedback received. Ultimately we just want to get as many people's opinions as possible to try and gain a consensus, that, after all, is what grades are about - a concensus opinion for how hard something is.

Your attitude saddens me especially when you consider that on another thread on this forum we are being criticised for not talking to the locals.

Alan

[Johnny Brown]

Oh right, so this is 'talking to the locals' is it?

Rockfax seems to be struggling to get grass-roots involvement with its guides. Why is this?

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Oh right, so this is 'talking to the locals' is it?

It is one method. I have emailed several people as well, and if I am out at the edge, or down the wall, I will chat to them. I am not aware of any methods of talking to the locals other than these. Of course a helpful specialist forum is usually the best method for this kind of thing since you can reach a wide range of people instead of dropping into the constricted opinions of a small local group.

Keep in mind that this is actually a routes guide I am seeking information for, so the bouldering will not be covered to any great depth, but it is important to be accurate, which is why I was seeking help on here.

Unfortunately I am bumping up against people like you who are more interested in axe-grinding and point scoring which is a shame and reflects badly on the forum as a whole, although I have picked up a link from someone which does give an indication about some grades.

Rockfax seems to be struggling to get grass-roots involvement with its guides. Why is this?

I think 19,400 comments and 137,000 votes on our databases would indicate that we are in fact getting more involvement at every level than any UK guidebook producer has ever previously managed.

Alan

[Johnny Brown]

I have no axe to grind. As for point scoring, I have no idea how that would work. Just for the record, I don't have a copy of the info you are after, so it's not me who is withholding it. Those who are have been silent thus far. I am at least prepared to discuss why folk might withhold it though.

Of course I am aware you have set up a database that gets lots of votes, I think the best thing about this is making new route info accessible rather than being kept in manky books in cafes. I'm not convinced about grading via anonymous online votes though.

However despite your protestations I think it is true that the kind of folk who are seen as 'the' local expert, and are prepared to give up time to actually write guide scripts are not doing so for you. Why is this? Is it simply because your selective guides are not attractive to them? Or is it because you haven't got the infrastructure to recruit them before they get narked at not being asked?

I have picked up a link from someone which does give an indication about some grades.

Are you going to share this to get the thread back on topic?

[Alan James, Rockfax]

However despite your protestations I think it is true that the kind of folk who are seen as 'the' local expert, and are prepared to give up time to actually write guide scripts are not doing so for you. Why is this? Is it simply because your selective guides are not attractive to them? Or is it because you haven't got the infrastructure to recruit them before they get narked at not being asked?

We have had a huge amount of help from local experts over the years - Dorset, Clwyd Limestone, all Peak books, Rjukan, etc. . In fact Lakes Bouldering is the only area where this has become and issue, despite there being over half a dozen locals listed in the acknowledgements. I get requests from locals all the time proposing new guides to areas we haven't covered yet, and literally hundreds of emails from people both local and not local.

So I can't answer your last questions because, in my perception, the scenario you mention isn't true.

Are you going to share this to get the thread back on topic?

It is just a previous thread on this forum - http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,4474.0.html

[cofe]

I think 19,400 comments and 137,000 votes on our databases would indicate that we are in fact getting more involvement at every level than any UK guidebook producer has ever previously managed.

Alan

does these statistics include the 36 votes cast for violent new breed, the 17 for Equilibrium or the 14 for Total Eclipse?

[Alan James, Rockfax]

does these statistics include the 36 votes cast for violent new breed, the 17 for Equilibrium or the 14 for Total Eclipse?

Those kind of routes always attract spurious votes. What is important is for us to learn how to interpret the votes and not be swayed where dodgy voting has taken place. What we experience with the votes is that, on the more popular routes, the votes drop into excellent bell curves built up of over 100 votes. Even on the lesser popular routes, there are votes and opinions which would have been so difficult to collect by other methods.

We have our own rules for how we interpret the votes suffice to say that 51% voting for an upgrade isn't good enough, whereas 51% voting for a downgrade is.

I am not saying the system is fool-proof but it is better than anything else around at the moment. Those who doubt it seldom have a more accurate alternative to suggest.

Alan

[Bonjoy]

 The voting thing is good but could do with some tweaks, such as having a broader range of grades (sometimes the correct grade is off the top or bottom of the options available) and grade type options (some stuff traditionally given route grades which are now climbed as problems, trad routes which have too much situ gear so should be considered sport routes or have been retro bolted).
 Would also be more interesting if routes not within the limited scope of the Rockfax guides were votable online (although to a lesser extent I guess your logbook thing is doing this). By doing this you would also find out which areas/routes previously excluded from guides deserve inclusion. It would also help to counter the accusation that Rockfax guides exaserbate(sp?) honeypotting on the established classics

[Alan James, Rockfax]

All good suggestions. I may have some improvements to the database scheduled for later in the year.

Too much to do and not enough time.

[dave]

I do find it rather contradictary that in any online discussion Mick always choses (conveniently) to ignore the opinions and arguments of "anonymous" individuals, and yet on the other hand it seems the primary means of rockfax gathering grading info for new guides is on the basis of anonymous voting. Going on Mick's theory, you should only accept grading vots if the individual in question is prepared to give their name, address, date of birth, mother's maiden name, blood group and credit card number, along with a signed passport photograph witnessed by a doctor and a school teacher.

[Alan James, Rockfax]

I disagree. Voting on grades and taking part in a discussion with others are different things.

For the online voting, you have to be registered to vote, and can only vote once on each route making large scale abuse of the system difficult, if not impossible. A bit like an election really - you are a known individual but your vote is private. It is also worth considering the fact that making voting systems any less anonymous would probably make them unusable. As I keep repeating, the results we get are forming excellent bell curves which is the measure of good, well-balanced statistics.

As for taking part in discussions anonymously: the desire of some people to express strong opinions and yet not put their name to it is something which beats me altogether. I can't even begin to comprehend why anyone would want to do this and I do tend to not take anonymous comments seriously (having said that, I don't regard the comments on this forum of registered 'identities' as anonymous despite the fact that I don't know who most people are).

Of course if they are the same, and there is a contradiction, then there would be an equal and opposite contradiction in your argument as well.

[Bonjoy]

As for taking part in discussions anonymously: the desire of some people to express strong opinions and yet not put their name to it is something which beats me altogether.

Come now it's not that hard to fathom. If those strong opinions differs from the convention of the day, maybe the poster would like the opportunity to discuss the point without attracting the opprobrium of the masses. Perhaps they would like to be able to explore a controversial subject , maybe only as devil's advocate, without risking a mauling by irate sheep next time they're seen down the wall. Isn't that part of the beauty of the internet, that you can discuss whatever you like without having to always pin your colours to the mast. Obviously anonymous mudslinging is a different matter.

[Bubba]

I always find this strange - "Putting your name to something" on the web is meaningless.

On my forums there are women registered as men, men registered as women, real looking names that are nothing like their real names, and the other assorted usernames.

Some of us on here know who each other are because we've met in real life, but really you can't rely on anything beyond that.

Surely it's the quality of posts that is important, not the "real" identity of who is behind them?

[Fiend]

On my forums there are women registered as men, men registered as women

Any on here?? 

[Bonjoy]

On my forums there are women registered as men, men registered as women, real looking names that are nothing like their real names, and the other assorted usernames.

Would that be your other forum, uktransexualswithidentitycrisis.com ?  

[dave]

For the online voting, you have to be registered to vote, and can only vote once on each route making large scale abuse of the system difficult, if not impossible.

to vote on the grades you only need a working email address and an assumed name. This in my eyes is no less anonymous than posting anonymously on UKC. Or indeed posting as a registered user on UKC! If you have several email addresses you can register as several users and vote several times. You dont even need a valid email address or a registration to leave comments against routes.

I agree that large scale abuse of the system is improbable, but that is beside the point. At the end of the day there is no more or less validity or comeback from someone registering and voting on a route grade than there is for someone posting on a forum unregistered. Its not as if owning an email address is the internet equivalent of a passport, a driving licence and a recent utility bill!

[Johnny Brown]

Its not the anonymous bit, I just don't think half the voters have done the routes they vote on. Obviously you get the extreme side of this with stuff like Gaskins', but I'm sure it goes on right down to the Vdiffs.
The fact that the stats make up normal distributions doesn't prove anything other that voters tend to follow a herd. There'e the old story of the BMC meet where they had a vote on Sentinel crack. Everybody voted, only two for an upgrade. Guess which two had done the route... but it didn't stop the others from having an opinion.

[Sloper]

The whole question on grading also depends on the person expressing an opinion.  My view counts for little as I'm often told I couldn't grade flour (i.e. doing 80% of an E5 thinking it was a VS albeit bloody hard for the grade).

Just off on a tangent for a moemnt, when was the last time an established route was downgraded?

I'm quite happily looking forward to the day when I can claim to have onsighted E9 on grit (the knock for example)

[Bubba]

On my forums there are women registered as men, men registered as women

Any on here?? 

yes.

Would that be your other forum, uktransexualswithidentitycrisis.com ? 

only at weekends

[BenF]

On my forums there are women registered as men, men registered as women

Any on here?? 

yes.

Damn, I've been found out. 

[Alan James, Rockfax]

I always find this strange - "Putting your name to something" on the web is meaningless.

There is a huge difference between a pure anonymous comment with no history or future, and that from a registered user to a site. It doesn't matter whether the registered user is a 10ft gorilla or a 13 year old school girl, they have an identity which can be associated with the comments; they are engaging in a debate by registering and putting a name to it; they have a past and future posting record to refer to which gives you an idea of their stance on other issues and whether or not they may have agendas.

I don't know 'tc' but I do know that he is always knocking Rockfax be it here, or on UKC as Oldskool, however he is engaging to debate with and I know where I stand when answering his comments. Contrast that to a bolt-from-the-blue anonymous comment. By its very nature it isn't entering any debate since it can't really associate itself with any future anonymous comments. It is a one off with no background, no follow up, nothing. It just sits there being nasty and negative usually, and any argument presented is hugely undermined because of this reluctance to enter into debate. In my experience on UKC most straight anon comments are rarely followed up.

As for the relevance to the Rockfax databases; see my answer below.

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

At the end of the day there is no more or less validity or comeback from someone registering and voting on a route grade than there is for someone posting on a forum unregistered. Its not as if owning an email address is the internet equivalent of a passport, a driving licence and a recent utility bill!

I am not sure what your point is here. If you are trying to point out a contradiction in Mick's and my arguments then you are arguing from a contradictory point yourself.

You suggest that anonymous votes on the Rockfax database have no validity, and anonymous comments on forums do. You can't have it both ways.

I don't think there is such a contradiction since the information being presented anonymously is being used in different ways. Anonymous votes are just having a small influence on an online voting system which, overall, is proving itself to be incredibly useful in guidebook writing. I am not saying it is perfect, but it is better than any current alternative. As long as we interpret the votes carefully then there isn't a problem and the dodgy votes are just a statistical anomaly.

Contrast that to anonymous negative comments on public forums and I am sure I don't need to spell out the difference.

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

The fact that the stats make up normal distributions doesn't prove anything other that voters tend to follow a herd. There'e the old story of the BMC meet where they had a vote on Sentinel crack. Everybody voted, only two for an upgrade. Guess which two had done the route... but it didn't stop the others from having an opinion.

It was actually Cave Crack at Froggatt - 20+ votes for leaving the grade, 2 for the upgrade (Chris Craggs and Paul Nunn - the two who had done the route).

So what is your point here? That online database votes are not a good method for getting accurate grade information and we should go back to the old committee method?

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Just off on a tangent for a moemnt, when was the last time an established route was downgraded?

We estimate around 100+ routes in Eastern Grit will be downgraded based on the voting on the databases.

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Any chance we could get back on topic on this thread for a moment at least.

I now have the following suggestions for grades from the old thread on here, plus a couple of emails for people.

Technical Genius - V6

Gritstone Megamix - V5

Oarsman Start - V4

Hornblower - V5

The Brigand - one comment for Font 8a, another for Font 7b+, but both were guesstimates from people who hadn't done it.

Desperot at Chatsworth has had no suggestions yet - does anyone actually do it?

Alan

[Johnny Brown]

It was actually Cave Crack at Froggatt - 20+ votes for leaving the grade, 2 for the upgrade (Chris Craggs and Paul Nunn - the two who had done the route).

So what is your point here? That online database votes are not a good method for getting accurate grade information and we should go back to the old committee method?

I thought the point was obvious - on the database you can't ask 'hands up who's actually done it?' You just have a 95% vote for the grade staying as it is. Hence one opinion like Chris or Paul's may often be worth 50 anonymous votes.

The database is great for giving folk an extra dimension when ticking a route but until you can only vote when you have climbed the route, and then beneath your vote it explains what your limit is, what your strengths and weaknesses are, and whether you were having a bad day...
A conversation between three climbers checking a guide script will take all these factors into consideration and is more likely to give an accurate grade.


I've heard V8+ mooted for The Brigand though I haven't done it myself.

[Alan James, Rockfax]

The database is great for giving folk an extra dimension when ticking a route but until you can only vote when you have climbed the route

Of course this is impossible although it could be stressed a bit more maybe. However, I think it is a fair assumption that the majority of votes on the majority of routes (except the special ones we have discussed already) are from people who have done the route.

A conversation between three climbers checking a guide script will take all these factors into consideration and is more likely to give an accurate grade.

Well this is where we have been before and it hasn't led to great grading, especially in the lower grades.

What if those three climbers are talking about a VDiff but all lead E5? To do it properly using this method you would need representatives from all the different grade bands - maybe three from each of, say, 4 grade bands - that's 12 people giving admittedly excellent feedback. However, no guidebook producer could ever manage such a system and you would still only have 3 votes on each route.

Give me 345 votes any day - http://www.rockfax.com/databases/r.php?i=5801

I've heard V8+ mooted for The Brigand though I haven't done it myself.

Thanks

[Ru]

The database is great for giving folk an extra dimension when ticking a route but until you can only vote when you have climbed the route, and then beneath your vote it explains what your limit is, what your strengths and weaknesses are, and whether you were having a bad day..

This is what bleau.info do. Before you can vote on a grade you must register that you have climbed the route, ie like the log book system on UKC.

[Alan James, Rockfax]

This is what bleau.info do. Before you can vote on a grade you must register that you have climbed the route, ie like the log book system on UKC.

That is a possible answer although it would be hard to implement, would still be open to abuse and would reduce the number of votes dramatically. (Logbook sees very little voting and most of the routes with big sets of votes are actually just the imported data from the Rockfax site that we set the thing up with).

Having analysed the huge amount of data built up on the Rockfax databases, I can only comment how useful and accurate the system appears to be. 99% of the time it is just used to confirm what everyone already knew.

Alan

[Fiend]

Contrast that to a bolt-from-the-blue anonymous comment. By its very nature it isn't entering any debate since it can't really associate itself with any future anonymous comments.

Well, if Nick had implemented the "search for IP address" function when I suggested it a few years ago...

I do agree though. An online identity is still some form of identity, for the reasons you gave. And there does seem to be a higher correlation of snide, purposeless posts from anonymous users than registered ones.

Anyway...

[tc]

Can you define "anonymous"? Am I anonymous? Are "Bonjoy", "Fiend", "r-man" and "Dave" anonymous?
Sounds like the bullshit conspiracy theory again

[Fiend]

From my perspective:

No, you're TC, you probably correspond to someone with those initials offline, you're an experienced boulderer in the north of england and quite a good one from what I pick up. You're involved with the Lakes scene, and most of your posts seem sound and sensible apart from the more vitriolic anti-Rockfax (don't worry I am too in general ) comments.

You have that at least as an identity.

[Palomides]

Internet anonymity is really about not trusting newbies 

This forum doesn't allow non-registered posts, but you still get new people making inflammatory comments - which are usually ignored.

Anyone with an established persona may still be divorced from their "real life" name, but i reckon that eventually the real opinons will become clear. And if any of us turn out to be a different sex, height, weight or species in real-life - does that really matter? Even people you've known for years can turn around and surprise you.

[tc]

Not "anti-Rockfax" per se, just anti-mediocrity and anti- shoddy jobs, when other alternatives quite obviously exist. Oh yeah, and very anti- self-important self-publicists. Egotism is nature's compensation for mediocrity. Rockfax often exhibit both in equal measure.
Lets up the ante,
Auntie TC

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Can you define "anonymous"? Am I anonymous? Are "Bonjoy", "Fiend", "r-man" and "Dave" anonymous?

No.

Did you actually read my reply to Bubba on the last page?

[Houdini]

There is a huge difference between a pure anonymous comment with no history or future, and that from a registered user to a site.

Balls.  Comment is comment.  I don't need to write my name at the bottom of the page to justify shit.  It's too late Al, now you read it! 

I've been looking at scandalous, fucking outrageous examples of  German city-grafitti for years.  The nature of the protest and it's effect on us all - remains the same.


Bleeeeeuurghhh! but now you gatta un-think it!

Q:  What do Al and Mick think of ground-up  Any thoughts?  Y'know, a bit of competition/rivalry?  Got to be good for business, that.


Houdini.

[tc]

Can you define "anonymous"? Am I anonymous? Are "Bonjoy", "Fiend", "r-man" and "Dave" anonymous?

No.

Did you actually read my reply to Bubba on the last page?

Yes, I did, but thank you for pointing it out again in that inimitable way you have. I am not "always" knocking Rockfax, I merely took issue with that heap of garbage you produced as a bouldering guide to the Lakes, for the reasons posted above and elsewhere, and with some of the comments posted by you and your colleague Mick. Some of your publications are OK. Some are sub standard, in my opinion. You might wish to devise a method of coping on a personal level with the inevitable criticism that poor work will always attract. Or you might not. In either case, I make no  apology for my robust opinions. If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the fucking kitchen.

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Q:  What do Al and Mick think of ground up?   Any thoughts?  Y'know, a bit of competition/rivalry?  Got to be good for business, that.

Looks good. Not much to say about it yet really. Obviously it is still 'work in progress' but there looks like there is plenty of potential there to make a decent site.

They might want to look at the sampling on the jpegs which currently seem to be saved at max quality making them about four or five times bigger than necessary and hence they slow down the page loading, however I suspect that is in hand as well.

Alan

[Alan James, Rockfax]

Yes, I did, but thank you for pointing it out again in that inimitable way you have. I am not "always" knocking Rockfax,...

Actually I was referring to the fact that you seem to have not understood my description of what I felt 'anonymous' was judging from your initial reply. I actually have no problem with you questioning Rockfax, it keeps us on our toes.

If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the fucking kitchen.

If this isn't the 'kitchen' then I don't know what is.

[Mick Ryan]

Q:  What do Al and Mick think of ground-up  Any thoughts?  Y'know, a bit of competition/rivalry?  Got to be good for business, that.


Houdini.

It about time. More independent guidebook producers the better. It means more choice and better guidebooks for all climbers. In the case of Ground Up they have one of the best guidebook authors and all-round-good-chaps ever, Mr. Streaky Desroy, Hudderfield's best boy, Simon and Al the designer.

Nice to keep it in the family.

It's all gold.

Mick

[Houdini]

Mick,

Streaky is a rabid collector of guide books! 



                                               Hmmmm...



I like my guidebooks like I drink my women:  small, square, and covered in plastic.

[Pantontino]

Just in case anybody is wondering why they can't access the Ground Up website referenced in the previous posts, I've just called my techy man and had him take the site down.

Sorry folks, it just ain't ready for public consumption yet. Alan was right, it is still very much a work in progress.

It'll be up and running very shortly with some lovely North Wales Rock sample pages (ahem, saved at the right size, ahem).