What SA Chris said. New climbers won't have a clue what the difference between font grades and UK tech grades and punters will think: "i can climb 5c at UCR so why can't i climb 5c here?"confusion ensues.
The overlapping middle grades will encourage climbers to try circuits that they might otherwise think too difficult - this is a real problem that rears it head when people limit themselves by numbers.
Quote from: BB on November 27, 2008, 11:59:41 amWhat SA Chris said. New climbers won't have a clue what the difference between font grades and UK tech grades and punters will think: "i can climb 5c at UCR so why can't i climb 5c here?"confusion ensues.Nothing new there then
I'm not from Bristol, but everyone I know from there has been moaning about this!
I can see a good argument for using single-move tech grades for a circuit.If you're capable of say 6a(Uk) then you should be able to do every move & therefore eventually every problem on the 6a circuit.Some of them might be very hard ( lots of moves high bouldering grade) & perhaps take a lot of working but in theory there shouldn't be any stopper moves.
New climbers won't have a clue what the difference between font grades and UK tech grades and punters will think: "i can climb 5c at UCR so why can't i climb 5c here?"confusion ensues.
So how is that different from the Font grades?
QuoteThe overlapping middle grades will encourage climbers to try circuits that they might otherwise think too difficult - this is a real problem that rears it head when people limit themselves by numbers.Strange - this reads as though you want to baffle people into trying harder circuits?Tech grades have never worked for bouldering (how can they, when they only describe the individual move?). Almost everyone has either been to Font or wants to. Why not go with grades that will give people a more useful measure of their ability and progress?I'm not from Bristol, but everyone I know from there has been moaning about this!Grades aside, good luck with your new wall!