[Idol eyes]

I have an opinion on this subject... but keepin schtoom!

[lagerstarfish]

I have an opinion on this subject... but keepin schtoom!

Is that because the English language is an inadequate tool for trying to convey the subtlties and complexities of the processes churning within your mind?

Or are you just chicken?

[Johnny Brown]

It would be a bit perverse to have a highball 7A that 7A climbers can't touch, or an E4 that only gets done by E7 leaders.

I think Sammo has hit the nail on the head here. Whilst some have had success and like to crow about it with a downgrade, we haven't heard so much from those who didn't get up it have we? Which includes plenty for whom neither 7A nor E4 would be out of the question.

I said above, on the second ascent it felt like an E6 6a though harder, by that I meant the start was not 6a; the grade fits the top half pretty well though. Compare to something similar, say Mint 400, E6 at Froggatt, which has harder moves though shorter and an easier escape. Oedipus next door is E4 and a rather easier proposition than either. Yes the routes to the right are overgraded, the left might just be E5 but the right one is not.

Unfortunately I think this is a route where being tall makes a big difference, the three hardest moves all have a big reach element, I'm not suprised Tom B found it easy, I remember thinking 'someone like Sellers would really piss this...' that doesn't make it easy for everyone. With some routes being that bit stronger than is required for the grade can really make them feel very easy.

I propose sending Fiend up as our standard E4/5 climber.

[Fiend]

Last time you were proposing a vote of no-confidence in Fiend - I think I liked that idea more!!

I do think people like to get their knickers in a twist about grading by firstly applying some sort of qualitive judgement to different grading systems, and secondly assuming that the grading system is more complex and obscure than it actually is. It's just a piece of information that describes expected and relative difficulty and tends to pretty much make sense as long as styles of ascent are clear...

[Jaspersharpe]

I think it's a great idea. On sight, no pads of course to get the E grade eh Fiend?

It's just a piece of information that describes expected and relative difficulty and tends to pretty much make sense as long as styles of ascent are clear...

Good point.

[travs]

This is a really tricky and quite interesting area of discussion and worthy of it's own thread. The problem as I see it is that in the UK we have 3 grading systems bouldering / trad / bolted. Whereas elsewhere ie France it is primarily a double grading system ie bouldering and routes. Hence taking Font as an example, they have no option but to stick to bouldering grades and state that it is highball because what sense would there be in giving the problem a bolted french grade? In the UK we can of course say that it is now so high that it is more like a route and so I will give it a trad grade. Now the demarcation between what is a problem and what is a route becomes even trickier as pads become thicker and more importantly how many mates you have with you and so how many mats you have under you. There is no easy answer but why not just give the route 2 grades, one as a highball boulder problem assuming mats and all, but also as a route with only a rope and gear. This is not so mad as it sounds because look at routes like Mint400 and Narcissus. These routes are no higher than the problem in  question but do you really think we should do away with the Trad grade and give them boulder problem grades -  I think not.

[uptown]

I have an opinion on this subject... but keepin schtoom!

I'm intrigued; Does this show you soloing an e4 or bloddering a 7b? 

[Fiend]

This is a really tricky and quite interesting area of discussion and worthy of it's own thread. The problem as I see it is that in the UK we have 3 grading systems bouldering / trad / bolted. Whereas elsewhere ie France it is primarily a double grading system ie bouldering and routes. Hence taking Font as an example, they have no option but to stick to bouldering grades and state that it is highball because what sense would there be in giving the problem a bolted french grade? In the UK we can of course say that it is now so high that it is more like a route and so I will give it a trad grade. Now the demarcation between what is a problem and what is a route becomes even trickier as pads become thicker and more importantly how many mates you have with you and so how many mats you have under you. There is no easy answer but why not just give the route 2 grades, one as a highball boulder problem assuming mats and all, but also as a route with only a rope and gear. This is not so mad as it sounds because look at routes like Mint400 and Narcissus. These routes are no higher than the problem in  question but do you really think we should do away with the Trad grade and give them boulder problem grades -  I think not.

Word.

[unclesomebody]

This is a really tricky and quite interesting area of discussion and worthy of it's own thread. The problem as I see it is that in the UK we have 3 grading systems bouldering / trad / bolted. Whereas elsewhere ie France it is primarily a double grading system ie bouldering and routes. Hence taking Font as an example, they have no option but to stick to bouldering grades and state that it is highball because what sense would there be in giving the problem a bolted french grade? In the UK we can of course say that it is now so high that it is more like a route and so I will give it a trad grade. Now the demarcation between what is a problem and what is a route becomes even trickier as pads become thicker and more importantly how many mates you have with you and so how many mats you have under you. There is no easy answer but why not just give the route 2 grades, one as a highball boulder problem assuming mats and all, but also as a route with only a rope and gear. This is not so mad as it sounds because look at routes like Mint400 and Narcissus. These routes are no higher than the problem in  question but do you really think we should do away with the Trad grade and give them boulder problem grades -  I think not.

I think you've just made my point for me. There are 2 options to make a route safe, either bouldering pads if it's a reasonable height, or a rope and gear if it's much higher. The way to distinguish between the two options is that we go with the one that makes it safer. At least that is logical tenet of trying to minimise risk rather than increase it, which I think we all do. Thumbelina doesn't require a rope or gear, so why give it a grade for rope and gear ascent? Why not give it a grade that assumes you are going to make it as safe as possible? In this case, lacking a rope and gear, the safest way is with mats, so I presume it would be graded for mats.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter. The system won't change and it's not a real problem in any sense because I can assess something regardless of whether it's E8 or font7B. It is only a problem when it comes to a grand theory of unification. I feel ya Albert.

[Jaspersharpe]

It is only a problem when it comes to a grand theory of unification. I feel ya Albert.

And it might be a while before we see that.

[mini]

With all the talk of bouldering grades or mutings that Thumb' felt more like an E4, it seems 3 of the casting votes still think its E7, though soft at the grade...

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=66252

 

[Johnny Brown]

Thumbelina doesn't require a rope or gear

Really Keith? If that were true I think you'd still be up there, yelling at passers by to throw you scraps of food. Out of interest, how did everyone else get back down?

[T_B]

Thumbelina doesn't require a rope or gear

Really Keith? If that were true I think you'd still be up there, yelling at passers by to throw you scraps of food. Out of interest, how did everyone else get back down?

Rappel. We were beta-ed up to the eyeballs.

[Johnny Brown]

Brilliant, two more reasons for you to find it easy. I'll take E7 for the downclimb then.

[T_B]

Brilliant, two more reasons for you to find it easy. I'll take E7 for the downclimb then.

And I once traversed off the break of West Side Story cos I was scared.

[Jim]

adding a bouldering grade to a route serves no purpose at all.
There are loads of routes with no gear on them that require soloing. What font grade for 3 blind mice? knocking? etc...

[T_B]

With all the talk of bouldering grades or mutings that Thumb' felt more like an E4, it seems 3 of the casting votes still think its E7, though soft at the grade...

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=66252

 

You get to vote three times for each route - E grade, tech and qual. So most likely one person has voted.

Font/V grades are increasingly useful on a lot of short routes with flat (ish) landings. Sole Power E5 6c (Font 7c?). Stanage Without Oxygen E5 6c (Font 7b?), The Sphinx E5 6c (Font 7a+?).

So by all means take the E number if you're there on your own sans pad, but if it's a nice flat landing and you can fall off in control, I'll be putting my pad down. I don't recall seeing many people trying these routes without pads in the past few years, though I seem to remember JB once saying to me that he made a point of not taking a pad to the crag!? Would Ron have used a pad on Careless Torque if they had existed?

I note that Andi did Thumbelina with "a couple of pads". I would expect that most folk will do it with a couple of pads and maybe a spotter or two.  I know it's a bit higher than your standard UK 'highball' but the location of the crux and nature of the climbing puts it in the highball category for me. And to my mind it makes more sense to give it a Font/V grade than call it E7. That's not to "p*ss all over" Andi's route or "crow", just to say it's a very 'tryable' and excellent highball, which should be considered by the bouldering masses. Just a shame Cornelius has that darn stump below it.

So why does it matter? Well, in an area such as the Peak, there aint much new going to go in bouldering guidebooks every time they are published. So you get link ups like La Terrace and god knows what sit down one move wonder filling the pages. If one's gaze were only to drift upwards towards Neferiti or Stanage Without Oxygen, for example, the boulderer, clutching his or her Moon Saturn, suddenly has a new problem to try. Remember West Side Story was E4 7a once!

[Johnny Brown]

You're preaching to the converted here Tom, the only quibble I have is with it being E4.

[Fiend]

This is a really tricky and quite interesting area of discussion and worthy of it's own thread. The problem as I see it is that in the UK we have 3 grading systems bouldering / trad / bolted. Whereas elsewhere ie France it is primarily a double grading system ie bouldering and routes. Hence taking Font as an example, they have no option but to stick to bouldering grades and state that it is highball because what sense would there be in giving the problem a bolted french grade? In the UK we can of course say that it is now so high that it is more like a route and so I will give it a trad grade. Now the demarcation between what is a problem and what is a route becomes even trickier as pads become thicker and more importantly how many mates you have with you and so how many mats you have under you. There is no easy answer but why not just give the route 2 grades, one as a highball boulder problem assuming mats and all, but also as a route with only a rope and gear. This is not so mad as it sounds because look at routes like Mint400 and Narcissus. These routes are no higher than the problem in  question but do you really think we should do away with the Trad grade and give them boulder problem grades -  I think not.

I think you've just made my point for me. There are 2 options to make a route safe, either bouldering pads if it's a reasonable height, or a rope and gear if it's much higher. The way to distinguish between the two options is that we go with the one that makes it safer. At least that is logical tenet of trying to minimise risk rather than increase it, which I think we all do. Thumbelina doesn't require a rope or gear, so why give it a grade for rope and gear ascent? Why not give it a grade that assumes you are going to make it as safe as possible? In this case, lacking a rope and gear, the safest way is with mats, so I presume it would be graded for mats.

I think you're extrapolating a bit much from Travs' post there. He's saying that because a route has two main forms of ascent AND two main grades that provide the best information for each of those ascents, that, well, it's fine to have two grades. Not that because one form of ascent is now much more popular that it should only be graded for one form and the other grade discarded.

At the end of the day it's all about INFORMATION. Not about "taking" grades but USING them. Adjectival grades still provide useful information to some people, even if they're not likely to be climbing them in that style.

[Jim]

giving it a font grade is misleading.
at least 95% of boulderers who might want to try this won't, because its a route.
Also how many boulder problems do you need a rope to get down from or do a traverse of death or downclimb an E2?

[T_B]

You're preaching to the converted here Tom, the only quibble I have is with it being E4.

I never said it was E4! If you look back earlier in the thread, that was the Adam Lincoln. He has not spoken to me about it. He chose to put a bit of banter twixt him and Bob on here, but I was trying to be diplomatic in my original post The point I was trying to make was that it's very hard to grade this sort of route, so better to give it a highball grade.

[Johnny Brown]

Aye, you did say:

E3 is probably being a bit unfair. The moves after the pocket are on very positive holds, and it's easy to reverse from the very last move if you like to a point where you can safely jump off. You don't generally get that on E5 grit solos, nevermind E6 or E7 (pads or no pads).

though!

[Adam Lincoln]

You're preaching to the converted here Tom, the only quibble I have is with it being E4.

I never said it was E4! If you look back earlier in the thread, that was the Adam Lincoln. He has not spoken to me about it. He chose to put a bit of banter twixt him and Bob on here, but I was trying to be diplomatic in my original post The point I was trying to make was that it's very hard to grade this sort of route, so better to give it a highball grade.

I didn't name any names Tom, it could have been anyone. You chose to say it was you, not me.

[andy popp]

This is getting bloody ridiculous.

Johnny, purely out of interest, how did Thumbelina differ as an experience from Angel's Share, which I think you did give a V grade to? This isn't meant to be a provocative question but a genuine attempt to get at what separates a route from a highball.

[T_B]

You're preaching to the converted here Tom, the only quibble I have is with it being E4.

I never said it was E4! If you look back earlier in the thread, that was the Adam Lincoln. He has not spoken to me about it. He chose to put a bit of banter twixt him and Bob on here, but I was trying to be diplomatic in my original post The point I was trying to make was that it's very hard to grade this sort of route, so better to give it a highball grade.

I didn't name any names Tom, it could have been anyone. You chose to say it was you, not me.

I tried to make a point in response that it's too difficult to give these things E grades. I said "The moves after the pocket are on very positive holds, and it's easy to reverse from the very last move if you like to a point where you can safely jump off. You don't generally get that on E5 grit solos, nevermind E6 or E7 (pads or no pads)."

In other words it didn't feel like an E5 solo in the vein of White Wand or Ulysses or Bust to me (above pads). Hence all the talk and refreshingly honest posts from Uncle about how highball font grades should perhaps be adopted for this type of route.  But that seems to have been lost along the way. Hey ho.