[Pantontino]

Going back to the Font versus V grade debate for a second (please humour me). The BMC/Rockfax line appears to be that a V grade/Brit tech combination is giving mainstream climbers (i.e the vast majority who operate below V6/7a) what they want. However the Font system actually has more scope for accurate grading of sub 7a problems. For example you can define the difference between a hard V4 (Font 6b+) or a steady V4 (Font 6b). Surely that is attractive to someone climbing at their limit at those grades, no?

[Johnny Brown]

I quite agree Si, its a better system, plus it doesn't stop at 5b/ V0.

However, I don't think it is 'giving mainstream climbers what they want'. They don't know what they want, nor do the BMC or Rockfax. The main argument imo is the lack of confusion with uk tech grades.

[Pantontino]

I think there is a danger of underestimating how savvy the average British climber is. Everybody goes to Font, even low grade climbers. When I was last there in the summer of 2005 the campsite was full of British climbers. I didn't see any superstars hanging out (obviously, because it was summer), just ordinary climbers. The same sort of people who camp in the field opposite the Vaynol in Nant Peris, or go to Stanage on a weekend to climb classic VSs.

Surely it is insulting to 'Joe (or Joanna) Bloggs' to suggest that he can't work out the difference between a Brit tech grade and a Font grade, especially when he clearly has extensive experience of both?

[north_country_boy]

True and to second what was raised by Bonjoy earlier in the....... Experience of climbing in Font - many people have .......experience of climbing in Hueco - very few have in comparison! (i imagine the BMC guidebook writers follow a similar demographic?!)

I for one prefer the Font system, however I have only climbed in Font for three days so i'm not sure you necessarily have to have climbed there extensively to understand the grading system....whether this applies for V grades I could say...

[unclesomebody]

After all the grade debates I've been through I've realised that quite simply grades don't matter below those at the cutting edge. Who gives a monkeys whether some problem is easy v4 or hard v4? Really, it just doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if something is soft 7C+ or hard 7C. It only matters at the cutting edge because those are the grades that are pushing standards forward. If I have a cross section of climbers and all ask them to climb a soft v6 and then to climb a solid v6, some will find the solid one easier etc. This just confirms the point that grades don't necessarily need to be all that accurate. Only at the very very top end do they need to be accurate.

When I built my board I started a grading system that was loosely built around the font system. It involves a number and a plus or a minus (or neither). So, a problem that is graded 7 is probably in the range 7A+,7B, or 7B+. I think specialisation of the lower grades (below font 8B) is a waste of time. I also noticed that Moon has copied my grading system and incorporated it into the moon board stuff. I would just like to state that I was first (by a good while). 

[Stubbs]

Surely it is insulting to 'Joe (or Joanna) Bloggs' to suggest that he can't work out the difference between a Brit tech grade and a Font grade, especially when he clearly has extensive experience of both?

On a point of clarity, having a guie with two systems that run 5a 5b 5c etc isn't going to look good, even if you stick to 6A 5c as they have suggested on 8a.nu

[Bonjoy]

 F7C (6c) looks fine to me. Hardly so bad that you have to stomach a second best grading system to avoid it.
 Uncle - Unlike yourself, most climbers are primarily concerned with the grades of things they can climb.

It only matters at the cutting edge because those are the grades that are pushing standards forward... Only at the very very top end do they need to be accurate.

Why?
Besides the top end grades will always be more prone to being inaccurate due to lower number of repeats, sponsor pressure, ego, first ascentionists being at or beyond their normal limit etc. It's only when they become slightly less than cutting edge that these anomallies come out, for example recent repeats of hard trad by Mcleod.

[unclesomebody]

Why?

Quite simply because we all want climbers to climb harder things. I do anyway, but then again I see climbing as a sport (not a recreational past time). I want to know if Koyomada really has climbed an 8C+. Has he really taken climbing to another level? Has he really done moves that are the new standard of hardness? Has Gaskins really pulled on the smallest hold ever? These things are interesting, because they show progression in climbing. Progression in so many varying factors that have led to another push in grades. That's why it matters.

I've realised that all the things I climb aren't hard. In fact, they are easy to most good climbers. So, it doesn't matter. Grades are now just a way of me being able to judge whether I should drive a few hours to try something. It doesn't matter if it's top end or bottom end of the grade. If it's roughly within my capability I'll see it as worth trying which is why I've given up on grade specialisation and gone with my personal system (on my board atleast!).

[Jim]

fuck grades, what about quality?

[Fiend]

Uncle - Unlike yourself, most climbers are primarily concerned with the grades of things they can climb.

Beatdown 

[Bonjoy]

Quite simply because we all want climbers to climb harder things. I do anyway, but then again I see climbing as a sport (not a recreational past time). I want to know if Koyomada really has climbed an 8C+. Has he really taken climbing to another level? Has he really done moves that are the new standard of hardness? Has Gaskins really pulled on the smallest hold ever? These things are interesting, because they show progression in climbing. Progression in so many varying factors that have led to another push in grades. That's why it matters.

 I'm interested in that shit too. But i'm more interested in stuff at or near my level, things, pertinant to this, including grades, matter more to me. It's a participant's interest as opposed to a spectator's interest.

I've realised that all the things I climb aren't hard. In fact, they are easy to most good climbers. So, it doesn't matter.

  Uncle uncle uncle it's all utterly relative. What's the point in calling 99.995% of climbing easy and 0.005% hard?? Who benefits by defining the world in those terms? Anyone who doesn't climb >8b+ is therefore not a good climber. And I suppose your lumping the rest of us 99.995% of climbers along with your assessment, we're all crap too? Suffice to say i'm not a fan of the hero worship/inferiority complex motif

[unclesomebody]

Bonjoy. I really do understand what you're saying. But to me there is nothing important about accurately grading something 7A+ or 7B. It doesn't matter. Only the grades of cutting edge routes/boulders matter. When 7A was first established in font this was really important. In 1960 it was really important to distinguish between 7A and 6C+. Now it doesn't matter. In 1983 it was important to know whether something was 8A or 7C+ but now things have moved on and that distinction doesn't matter so much. What matters now is 8C or 8C+. I can understand why you might disagree (although I think you agree).

I'm not into hero worship/inferiority complex stuff either. I have great respect for good climbers but don't worship them. The point of calling 99.999% of climbing easy and the remainder hard is simply that it's true. It's not an opinion so much as fact. Hard will always be a term reserved for the cutting edge of human endeavour. 7A is hard for some people, I know that, but it's not important whether that thing they found hard was 7A or 7A+. Grades are not the (only) way to measure your improvement.

[Bonjoy]

Ok, we are agreed it's a matter of semantics, it's all relative.
But don't you find it slightly annoying when Steve Mclure moans about how crap and weak he is? The implication being 'I onsight 8b+ and I consider myself weak, you onsight way less than this and therefore...'

[Johnny Brown]

Your hero-worship is deluding you. There is no more quantifiable or meaningful difference between 8C and 8C+ than 7A and 7A+. Neither apply to all people equally.

The point of calling 99.999% of climbing easy and the remainder hard is simply that it's true, oh its so true, those guys, y'know, they're Gods I tell you. Next to them I am nothing, nothing.

What are you gabbing on about? Get a grip man.

[dave]

the difference between a 7a and a 7a+ is about 10000 times more important than the difference between an 8c and an 8c+, namely because the former directly effects about 10000 time  more climbers than the latter. who gives a shit if somethings 8c or 8c+, it only directly effects a slack-handful of climbers worldwide who can climb that stanard. most of them will get dropped to 8b+ anyway once someone does 9a+.

[saltbeef]

But don't you find it slightly annoying when Steve Mclure moans about how crap and weak he is? The implication being 'I onsight 8b+ and I consider myself weak, you onsight way less than this and therefore...'

i don't just find it slightly annoying i find it positively insulting. steve you're not being humble. you're one of the best climbers in the world. your knickname is strong steve, what more do you want? a fucking medal? uncle's got a box of them or so he was telling me.

[Dr T]

don't you find it slightly annoying when Steve Mclure moans about how crap and weak he is? The implication being 'I onsight 8b+ and I consider myself weak, you onsight way less than this and therefore...'

 

i don't just find it slightly annoying i find it positively insulting.

 seconded

  not that I'd wish what I've been through on anyone but he should try to comprehend what it's like to be lying in hospital doubting whether you'll every walk properly again then square my utter joy at getting back to sending measly font 6c's....

of course I obvious shit and not worthy of crawling up to a crag in penance....

[Danny]

don't you find it slightly annoying when Steve Mclure moans about how crap and weak he is? The implication being 'I onsight 8b+ and I consider myself weak, you onsight way less than this and therefore...'

 

i don't just find it slightly annoying i find it positively insulting.

 seconded

  not that I'd wish what I've been through on anyone but he should try to comprehend what it's like to be lying in hospital doubting whether you'll every walk properly again then square my utter joy at getting back to sending measly font 6c's....

of course I obvious shit and not worthy of crawling up to a crag in penance....

Have I missed something? Whats with all this Steve-bashing? Yes, he is shit- hot and yes, he does seem to go on about his "weakness" a bit. I always got the impression he was refering to his bouldering, rather than routing, prowess. In addition, in the traditional British idom, I always think a bit of self-deprication is mostly meant in light heart, even though some may use it as a form of spraying. Lets face it, we as climbers all have larger than average egos - its just that some prefer to veil it, whilst others are more honest

[Dr T]

Have I missed something? Whats with all this Steve-bashing?

okay so I was suffering post op pain (six months on) and in a foul mood  yesterday (marking mock GCSE scripts will do that to you)...

so not necessarily meaning to knocking Steve but agreeing with the sentiment that it does rankle more than a bit when the massively talented go on about how shit/weak/etc they are, or spout on about how such or such a shit hard problem/route was "easy", Rich P on Careless torque, he might not of found it as tough as he was expecting but easy, but have some perspective.... 8a is/can never be "easy"

sometimes that sense of perspective and what it's like for average punters like us wouldn't go amiss otherwise they're (inadvertently maybe) belittling what we do

we have/need to have our heroes to look up to, that's how life works, it would just be nice if some (by no means all, but some) of them were a little more aware of the effect their comments, throw away or not, can have on the rest of the community who naturally look up to them for inspiration

without trying to gain props for name dropping there are guys and girls out there Sam and Lucinda , Mark and Dani, to inadvertantly pick a couple of couples, who never seem less than thankful for what they can achieve and always seem to go out of their ways to help/encourage and basically spread the love around, that's what a small community based sport/lifestyle like bouldering/climbing needs....

 feel free to disagree, I'm sure someone will....

(not say bonjoy is an average punter though I'm sure he's modest enough to believe that he is)

[fatdoc]

that's no flame in my book mate.

well made point...

after also being more than slightly fucked up in recent times I also understand the issues of rehabing after major trauma.. and respect is due there also....

[Dr T]

points taken and agreed with...

I didn't mean it to sound like I've got a chip (I really haven't) and I really wasn't trying to be personal, and it's not even that I feel insulted I just feel a little down hearted when some of our sponsored heroes go on about how crap they are or how easy things are (for them)

in answer to gruff yeah I've said I was weak, but pretty much in the context of "too weak to do that..." which I think is a bit different

in all fairness that might have been the context that steve said it in,

(as I said my post yesterday was made from grumps-ville, sorry  )

in reality my climbing heroes have always been people I known so I only hear about the things the real big guns say in the press or on here (living in GU6 rather than S7 will do that!) so I guess that sometimes twists the context of the statement

 but for one thing if I am feeling like a grumpy bastard I just need to think back six months when things weren't quite so good

as for climbing 6c again , it's all indoors above nice spongy mats for the moment but I'll be up in the peak at half term so I'll be able to get a better perspective then (probably in the works if the weather keeps up  ) - maybe bump into you guys....
(and thanks for the encouragement-it helps.....)

[Bonjoy]

...find it slightly annoying...

 Have I missed something? Whats with all this Steve-bashing?

Hardly Steve bashing ???

[whispering nic]

In 1983 it was important to know whether something was 8A or 7C+ but now things have moved on and that distinction doesn't matter so much. What matters now is 8C or 8C+.

Latest issue of Grimper says  that 9a is where 'haute niveau' is at. 8c+ is soo 90's.

[unclesomebody]

Because you're a newbie I'll explain it nicely. 8A represent a bloc grade, whereas 8a represents a french route grade. Now please re-read the above with this information...

[Doylo]

i find it more funny than anything when beasts like steve complain about being weak. it just goes to show we re all in the same boat, apart from sharma of course