11

news / Re: Significant First Ascents

« Last post by Stu Littlefair on Today at 12:44:35 pm »

Nice vid and beautiful line but it did make me laugh how they make such a big deal out of it being the true stand given he starts off stacked pads.

12

bouldering / Re: Non-Quality Bouldering Videos

« Last post by M1V0 on Today at 12:16:12 pm »

One a friend put together of a newly developed venue in the Lakes:

13

bouldering / Re: Non-Quality Bouldering Videos

« Last post by Fiend on Today at 11:29:13 am »

Something to pass a few minutes of a rainy day... The Miterdale forest boulders are less well known then Eskdale Fisherground, but offer aesthetic climbing throughout the grades in a cool setting. This wee selection includes one of the hardest, and best, problems I did this spring.

This was also the day that I met a very cute and friendly mouse, but alas I didn't get any footage of that - you'll have to go find him yourself.

14

MoonBoard / Re: Moonboard - climbing by numbers or rather LED lights

« Last post by jwi on Today at 11:02:01 am »

The hold in position G11 on the minimoonboard is the one that first gets slippery very humid days, and the last to dry out when I turn on the dehumidfier. Clearly much worse than other holds, but there are a few mores that got affected when we had >70% RH at 22 C. (I cannot remember which ones from the top of my head).

Plywood holds seem more affected than the pure wood holds I have (not birch, so hard to compare). And as you say, it seems a bit random.

15

MoonBoard / Re: Moonboard - climbing by numbers or rather LED lights

« Last post by SA Chris on Today at 10:40:00 am »

That sounds like exactly the case here.

16

news / Re: There’s a bloke fighting this weekend

« Last post by spidermonkey09 on Today at 10:32:02 am »

The first Fury Wilder fight illustrates this quite well. Fury was knocked down twice but got up on both occasions. By most observers scorecards he comprehensively won the vast majority of the other 10 rounds, which should have meant he was the winner fairly comfortably. According to the judges, it was a split decision draw; one judge scored it a draw, one scored it by a few rounds to Fury, and the other scored it (somehow!) to Wilder by 4 rounds. Boxing is about much more than knocking the opponent over. Its about ringcraft, making your opponent miss, precise punching, meaningful punching rather than glancing blows off the gloves and shoulders. Its really complex to score and is very subjective which is why there is often controversy when judges scorecards are reviewed. Individuals preferences come into it a lot. Some judges like fighters who are on the front foot and reward what they see as positivity. Others value making the opponent miss and won't penalise a fighter who dances around more. Its very interesting but obviously a lot more straightforward  when someone gets knocked out!

17

get involved: access, environment, BMC / Re: Spad climbing

« Last post by Bonjoy on Today at 10:28:58 am »

Cross posted with JB. I'd go along with everything he's said there.
Taking advantage of a precedent of getting away with something in the past is not a great strategy in this instance.

18

news / Re: There’s a bloke fighting this weekend

« Last post by Dac on Today at 10:25:28 am »

Thanks for that, I’d always assumed it was 1 point scored for each ‘good’ blow landed, I’d never noted how the points were nearly always 10 and 9!

It’s curious how so little is gained in points from a knockdown, seeing as in essence that’s practically the aim of the match. A fighter can knock down their opponent, and that opponent only be saved from a knockout by the referee intervening and giving a standing count; but loose 2 other rounds by the narrowest of margins and it’s all for nothing. (But then the scoring in the bouldering still confuses me).

19

get involved: access, environment, BMC / Re: Spad climbing

« Last post by Bonjoy on Today at 10:24:41 am »

Is there a record for the area then of fixed/insitu gear that has been agreed? And do we know if any of the fixed gear in discussion was ever agreed anyway. There are a couple of very old pegs at the top (top in a sporty sense, end of the clean overhanging rock, where it transitions into a chossy easier angled groove) of EOTT. These are where the bolt was that I saw chopped . The bolt backed up the pegs which are now pretty poor. I think one has no eye and the other was shit.
On a separate but semi-related topic, has EOTT had many on sights? Steve? Jacopo?

To my knowledge (and this agreement pre-dates my time in this role) the only request that has been made to install fixed gear has been an after the fact request (by me)to retain bolts on the line which they had complained about us not seeking permission to bolt. Understandably they refused to allow these to stay. This was also because they were very visible from the main path. Beyond that no developers have chosen to ask either directly or via the BMC before bolting, so no other requests have been put in. Some bolts (not many) have slipped in under the radar over the period of the agreement, which suggests the owner doesn't have a comprehensive log of fixed gear and/or doesn't check it regularly. I think it would show bad faith on the part of climbers to use this as rationale to keep pushing until we receive another complaint though.
If climbers collectively decide that something other than the historical collection of fixed gear is desirable it could be requested as an update to existing access arrangements. Up to a point landowners are in favour of well maintained safety equipment, if it has low visible impact and doesn't pose a risk to the general public.

20

get involved: access, environment, BMC / Re: Spad climbing

« Last post by Johnny Brown on Today at 10:21:16 am »

Ethics aside, gear precedents don't matter here. The BMC access team have a good idea what is in place and what would be problematic. Contact us! This area has every conservation designation under the sun, which means any work carried out needs prior approval from Natural England. The landowner has to do this for all sorts of work, they therefore cannot allow, or even turn a blind eye to, the use of power drills as climbers see fit. As noted above, this is not to say it won't be allowed - if it is agreed first and the rationale is clear it often will be. But unauthorised drilling will be viewed very dimly indeed.

These requirements exist elsewhere, and climbers have often got away with ignoring them. But that isn't a trend that is going to continue, and this is one location where it absolutely can't. As I said above, look at what has happening in the US. Broadly, climbing activity is generally fine with most conservation landowners. But bolt placement generally isn't, and often they have a legal requirement to manage it. If we can't show that we can behave by the rules, the rules will be both tightened and enforced.