pretty blatant as dabs go
Uptowngirl, is that a "spot the dab" game? I'm going for the phot in the middle of second row?
Fiend, Fiend, Fiend, people in glass houses and all that http://www.fiendy.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/fiend_sanc.avi
'just' the clothing, honest.... :wink:
Please note that I don't weight the mat on the undercling move, and did this a few times without my clothing brushing it at all - I tried to get a better video but unfortunately just got a flapper instead :roll:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dab
how do these northern boys sleep at night?
Have they no shame up there?
Keeping Claus on the rock was a full-time job...
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e67/houdini2/Clausgettingpushedon.jpg)
More than a dab that was a full on sit down rest. Quality.
Obviously the influence of being in contact with the critically acclaimed ScottO'Conorhas been rubbing off on these Copleys when it comes to deciding what consitutes an ascent.
more like hillwalking with a bad sequence rather than climbing.
those dabs are so mad its more like hillwalking with a bad sequence rather than climbing.
You have to wonder why the guy who edited that together thought I'd want to spend twenty seconds of my life watching him tie his laces, the mind boggles.
You have to wonder why the guy who edited that together thought I'd want to spend twenty seconds of my life watching him tie his laces, the mind boggles.
fuck thats one of my pet hates in climbing clips on tinternet.
There are more rooms for me to improve.
Awesome music! Especially the hardcore French reggae rap who's it by?
Big bum dab at 29 sec
boulder a targasonne (http://www.vimeo.com/22525368)
:spank:
The front page video with Zippy's trav in it is a horrorshow of dabbage.
Stanage Weekends on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/61214807)
Credit for going RH up on BP though
Credit for going RH up on BP though
QuoteCredit for going RH up on BP though
Why credit? Its more awkward, unnecessarily powerful and not as pleasant.
QuoteCredit for going RH up on BP though
Why credit? Its more awkward, unnecessarily powerful and not as pleasant.
:agree: I'm afraid
If you wanna look burly (or do it Ben's way for historical reasons) you'd be going rh first then lobbing the left toe on, not heel on and going wrong handed for no particular reason at all.
Well when I went up left hand I felt like I was tricking the boulder, like a fly on a horse - trying to hitch a free ride to glory in the grand national.
Going right hand up is giving the middle finger to the boulder, and to the accepted beta.
'Beast mode engaged'
Since no one else does it that way, I have to assume it is fecking hard and therefore worthy of credit.
Maybe this will bring in a new age of BP ascents that draw a middle ground between the 'Ben' beta and the 'soft' beta
Maybe it really is 7C that way? :worms:
P-Bert certainly is the man of the moment!
P-Bert certainly is the man of the moment!
Surely you mean the man man man of of of the the the moment moment moment?
my word.
my word.
I love how the spotter stares at the mat afterwards, you can tell he's thinking, "surely he's not going to take the tick?"
I'd have taken that, the pad was in the way. Fuck 'em.Word. That's a valid ascent, even worth an added + for the effort of kicking the mat away.
"i dabbed on the jug though"
Proof that ethics, like morals, exist on a sliding scale for some folk
I'd have taken that, the pad was in the way. Fuck 'em.Word. That's a valid ascent, even worth an added + for the effort of kicking the mat away.
:devangel:
Just found this on 8a. spew. Man of the moment Pirmin Bertle dabbing at 4000m on the hardest boulder in India (Font 8B+), starts at 3:18. Not once but about 4 times on the pads! Couldn't believe this :shrug: Nice video otherwise
vimeo.com/146420012 (http://vimeo.com/146420012)
Thats all very well 36chambers but would you have stood the moral high ground if it was somewhere that you didn't frequent? Just curious
I initially thought it was a dab but the acoustics in that place are weird, so I think it's the sound of foot on rock. Later foot-on-rock noises sound similar.
That's why I put banging hardcore on my videos. You'll never be able to pick out the foot-mat slapping. Or any intelligble sounds at all...
Mr MacLeod with a mcLOUD dab at 1:04ish. You can hear it very distinctly, the oh so painful sound of the unrecognized dab...
That's bizarre... Especially in light of the fact that he then does basically the SAME problem from half a move lower cleanly. Being charitable, perhaps it was only included because it's a better camera angle?
Enormous! I wonder what grade he gives the stand?
Most dabbed climb in the forest?
Must be something about font at the minute it's providing us with some classic dab action!
The new font vid on the ukb Vimeo (is that orite) has a cracker on the L'Oblique footage you actually see the mat come flying back into picture!
Classic!
The new font vid on the ukb Vimeo (is that orite) has a cracker on the L'Oblique footage you actually see the mat come flying back into picture!
L'Oblique must be a contender for most dabbed, probably 2 out of 3 "ascents" that I've witnessed have involved dragging the floor or bumping the block.That's the only reason I "haven't" done the bloody thing. Keep dabbing!
Dab, dubious line
https://s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/bleauinfomp4/2009/13448.mp4
If you're bored or interested you can compare vids here https://bleau.info/y/13448.html
Looks like he was trying to dig out a lower start with his heel
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dab, dubious line
https://s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/bleauinfomp4/2009/13448.mp4
If you're bored or interested you can compare vids here https://bleau.info/y/13448.html
Despite the heinous dab and rock eroding slithers, theres some decent technique on display considering they're a 'sturdy calf'...
I think this is a dab...If you dabble remove with discrete camera placement/editing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFR6dffou7k
06:18 First Free Ascent......blatant rope dab, back around Mr Wharton!!
https://vimeo.com/113758922
that really is bad lol. Rope tension is the only thing that kept him on!
http://www.epictv.com/media/uservideo/climbing-lalchimiste-8b-in-font/605452Spotting like that does my nut in, he's basically carrying the other climber up!
Only slight dabs but a dab is a dab and on such a famous problem surely better morals are required.
Does anybody seriously think that whatever slight contact with a spotter there was there actually made a difference to the result?What the spotters were doing didn't make a blind bit of difference.
I reckon yeah, unless you're Dave Graham.
Thing that always gets me is people doing low roof problems or traverses then halfway through chalking up from a chalkbucket on the ground, and hence immediately invalidating the ascent.
Would fist bumping someone make an ascent invalid? :worms:
If you look real hard you might be able to spot the dab on this. Very minor at most. Totally legit ascent.
Calling out dabs is all very well and good in cases where it blatantly should have been "back around", but if it means that people don't get a proper spot on problems that really need it then maybe we need to have a think about whether it's better for your t-shirt to touch a spotters hand or to go home with a broken leg. FWIW, I'm happy to go back and do Suavito without a dab, but I'd still have a spotter on the block.
All this talk of crap spotting is a bit shit.
All this talk of crap spotting is a bit shit.
No one is trying to fault Huw's spotting, he did a very good job, it's your shocking footwork that we're mocking here.
The real crap spotting in the video is from me when Dave plummets like a meteorite into the pads
to me the point of spotting is to make sure the falling person lands on the pads.
surely thats what the pads are for?
Quoteto me the point of spotting is to make sure the falling person lands on the pads.
surely thats what the pads are for?
+1.
Also to make sure the faller doesn't then catapult sideways into a rock after hitting the pad
Yes, but he landed flat on his back, which is hardly great. With a better spot to his upper body he could have landed feet first and not had such a smack down.
Don't know how to get the link for the newest Instagram clip of Adam ondra:
https://www.instagram.com/adam.ondra/
I'm sure there is a good reason for that heel to be on that pad, some local rules about protecting the flora?
Don't know how to get the link for the newest Instagram clip of Adam ondra:
https://www.instagram.com/adam.ondra/
I'm sure there is a good reason for that heel to be on that pad, some local rules about protecting the flora?
Does this mean the FA is still up for grabs?
Hair dab (https://www.instagram.com/p/BMU6A12hdB0/)
https://www.instagram.com/p/BJq8Cz6hCcQ (https://www.instagram.com/p/BJq8Cz6hCcQ)
t shirt for dab fans
(http://www.release.org.uk/sites/default/files/shop/images/CDW_2015_2.jpg)
Too good an opportunity not to heckle :)
https://www.instagram.com/p/BME3p5KDeme/?taken-by=george_atherton99
This guy is a gold mine.
More Instadab...as Scouse spotted, this guy's a serial offender, and as Dave spotted he's doubled down with a wrong start too.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BME3p5KDeme/
yup
Quoteyup
My comments got deleted!
So I re-typed them :)
Quoteyup
My comments got deleted!
So I re-typed them :)
I've seen a weird habit in some people's Vimeo Yorkshire Grit vids of just making up a grade that's not in any book, climbing the wrong line and claiming the problem next to it...
I guess nowadays people think it's legit to
take owt for owt.
I've seen a weird habit in some people's Vimeo Yorkshire Grit vids of just making up a grade that's not in any book, climbing the wrong line and claiming the problem next to it...
Where's that old codger emoji?!
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Seems to be a thing now, probably as a result of online logbooks, where folk seem to think that every conceivable passage across rock needs a name a grade writing in the UKC database so the can tick something. You can't just climb a bit of rock anymore.
must. grade. everything.
Wow, what a dab. Exact time below if you don't want the excitement of spotting it yourself.much praise to you good sir :bow:NSFW :
there also might be some old school footage dabbing around 25:11, but I need a second opinion.
Thanks for Stubs for spotting this gem. It's pretty subtle though. You're going to have to watch closely to spot it. No more clues.
Thanks for Stubs for spotting this gem. It's pretty subtle though. You're going to have to watch closely to spot it. No more clues.
Thanks for Stubs for spotting this gem. It's pretty subtle though. You're going to have to watch closely to spot it. No more clues.
https://youtu.be/Hp_8USqKPP0?t=602
An impressive spotter dab at around the 10 minute mark.
https://youtu.be/Hp_8USqKPP0?t=602
An impressive spotter dab at around the 10 minute mark.
https://youtu.be/Hp_8USqKPP0?t=602
An impressive spotter dab at around the 10 minute mark.
that's a guilty looking high 5. you can tell she knows.
https://vimeo.com/195154509
that's a guilty looking high 5. you can tell she knows.
https://vimeo.com/195154509
Looks like a sick problem, what is it?https://youtu.be/Hp_8USqKPP0?t=602
An impressive spotter dab at around the 10 minute mark.
I like the fact he looks surprised when it happens.
Looks like a sick problem, what is it?
Looks like a sick problem, what is it?
The name of the problem flashes up in the video, if you miss it you can go back a few seconds and watch it again.
Looks like a sick problem, what is it?
Willackers suffering a rare Carp Dab at Castle Hill...
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/1/571/30832516633_d1df624d1e_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/NYyH1n)Carp Dab (https://flic.kr/p/NYyH1n) by Simon HUthwaite (https://www.flickr.com/photos/fatneck/), on Flickr
There's something funny with the Scale there...
There's something funny with the Scale there...
You're on Fin ice starting fish puns
I've haddock with this thread.
Kudos slackers, was in the pub with little time to check, wad on your wayLooks like a sick problem, what is it?
The name of the problem flashes up in the video, if you miss it you can go back a few seconds and watch it again.
This is why I have such respect for Slackline. Anyone else would have seen Coops' post and gone "Bloody hell, Ross, open yer eyeballs mate" and moved on. But Slackline will not rest, he will not tire, he will not stay his fingertips from keyboard, until everyone, everywhere, is correct. The dogged persistence with which he corrects even the most minor lapses in concentration is nothing short of breath-taking.
Shoaly that's enough now, best toe the line, the mods will be giving you the rod if you don't reel yourselves back
Shoaly that's enough now, best toe the line, the mods will be giving you the rod if you don't reel yourselves back
It was Eel, sorry Lee who used to moan about punning, so we are off the hook.
You are Floundering now.
You are Floundering now.
But it takes a real manta admit it.
You are Floundering now.
But it takes a real manta admit it.
Ray Wood
we all need to scale back
Perhaps we should scale it back at bit
we all need to scale backPerhaps we should scale it back at bit
Smack around :spank:
No idea why I keep picking on Will.
Think you'll find I've used Fin already, 20 press ups forfeit.we all need to scale backPerhaps we should scale it back at bit
Smack around :spank:
I'll think you'll find I used scale in the first pun... back around all of you - including Will! Sorry if that seems a bit shellfish.
Anyway enough. Fin.
Could at least try to seabed it properly!For god's hake...
Willackers suffering a rare Carp Dab at Castle Hill...
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/1/571/30832516633_d1df624d1e_c.jpg) (https://flic.kr/p/NYyH1n)Carp Dab (https://flic.kr/p/NYyH1n) by Simon HUthwaite (https://www.flickr.com/photos/fatneck/), on Flickr
There's something funny with the Scale there...
Aaaaaannnnnnyyyyyywwwwwaaaaaayyyyy....back on topic:At least he takes the dab comments on the chin :thumbsup:
Probably the most / equal most dabbed Font problem going but still...
[URL]https://www.instagram.com/p/BOClTKMgsK7/[URL]
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Perfectly good thread here and you guys have to go an fillet with bad puns.a rare Dave typo in there!! Bet you're gutted.
Sorry about the typo, that post was proving difficult to orca-strate.
https://youtu.be/BWoQMHgvfEI
A cracker around the 5:15 mark on here too.
Edit: how the fuck do you embed videos now? Tried what used to work...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qDSYLb9uKg&t=3m05s
Wasn't sure where to put this at first, until 3:05 that happened. Jesus h etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qDSYLb9uKg
Hmmm, not sure about that one, close certainly...He's got a leg jam against the mat to start it.
that watches like gay hipster-bear soft pr0n. Two hench 'n hairy tattooed blokes in the woods.. phwooarrrrr etc..
Hmmm, not sure about that one, close certainly...He's got a leg jam against the mat to start it.
Second problem in, starts at 0:58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4KZugAV_80
The two most heavily-dabbed problems in font?
Second problem in, starts at 0:58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4KZugAV_80
Amazing dab on that 4th problem, that's the one that's features umpteed times on here in the past isn't it? You'd maybe think given the dab that the doubled pad to start from might have been overkill.
One from the south @22 seconds
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkuYZfIKLrQ
Ermm.. isn't that Nicotine Alley minus the finish? Surely it finishes on the high jug- tricky when tired?
Ermm.. isn't that Nicotine Alley minus the finish? Surely it finishes on the high jug- tricky when tired?Yep, definitely finishes by rocking around the arete onto the slab. One of the only good bits of climbing on southern sandstone so it seems strange not to finish it properly.
So many spotter dabs, almost holds her up the whole way
https://www.instagram.com/p/BPpdrsmlRw_/?taken-by=alyssa_neill
Ermm.. isn't that Nicotine Alley minus the finish? Surely it finishes on the high jug- tricky when tired?Yep, definitely finishes by rocking around the arete onto the slab. One of the only good bits of climbing on southern sandstone so it seems strange not to finish it properly.
Yes, he is occasionally touching me on this go. No, I don't care about your opinion. My spotter kept me safe with limited pads. Minimizing my risk while I am trying hard is more important than risking injury that could prevent me from climbing. Got it? Good 👍
Yes, I landed flat on my butt a couple tries
Yes, he is occasionally touching me on this go. No, I don't care about your opinion. My spotter kept me safe with limited pads. Minimizing my risk while I am trying hard is more important than risking injury that could prevent me from climbing. Got it? Good 👍
Just don't post how proud you are to send it.
I've just watched it back and I think I may have been so desperate to catch him out I saw something that wasn't there.
Multitasking at work etc.
We all make mistakes eh Dave :wave: :shrug:
I may have been so desperate to catch him out I saw something that wasn't there.
Rope dab.
https://instagram.com/p/BSejK2Th9jL/
Rope dab.
https://instagram.com/p/BSejK2Th9jL/
Can't be a great advert for lattice training if he's needing to rest 2 moves into a route.
Chalkdab at 03:00
https://vimeo.com/210807266
Coops make sure you do a spoof video of that, try to cut loose and spotter dab on every move.if only I was strong enough for this, no cigar this time...
And various at 13:00 - 13:45 :ohmy:
I couldn't see that one. He was getting adjusted and bumping the pad around, but it looks clean after he pulled on, which seems a miracle given the lay down start, lowball nature of what looks like a classic boulder.And various at 13:00 - 13:45 :ohmy:
Did 12:45 escape the censors?
Starting in the wrong place? Check.
you can either accept penalty points or attend a 3 day dab awareness course
Steward's enquiries on these please. Why does climbing not have a Hawkeye equivalent?
https://www.instagram.com/p/BS4GxTWl5IU/?taken-by=george_atherton99
interesting sit start too
https://vimeo.com/237280730
Wind-born dab at 1:55...
https://youtu.be/sxqL55gMxo0?t=2m38s
I am confused. Why do he add weight when he still need to jump off the floor to break the dead hang?
What I find even worse than cheating, is the load of cr*p that is given as training advice.
The "Do this for x weeks, then add 10 kg for x weeks..." etc. is complete and utter bullshit.
Nothing like having a little lie down in the middle of a bum shuffle to conserve energy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1KSHdxMghM
See how many spotter dabs you can count in the first 2 mins (you'll have to look closely)
serial offender on the loose again
as he's "sponsored" by black diamond and got a new pad, he really should know better by now
Old Dabbi Andrada here, with multiple chalk bag dabs and a full body slam at about 1:10:
http://youtu.be/geNxrEej18w (http://youtu.be/geNxrEej18w)
Sorry for the FB link - I don't think you can embed them otherwise, non?
Anyway, Dabby Andrada at 1:08, and possible 0:38 (can't be sure because of the editing)
https://www.facebook.com/Boreal.official/videos/223102241861428/
Really? Great minds I guess. On this thread too? My apols.
One of those that probably made no difference but friends don’t let friends dab ;D
The real horror show starts at 4:48 (though there may be more - Editor's note: a LOT more). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up1Frdvg2D4
when he pulls off the ground.
Phenomenal stuff from start to finish. Dare I ask how you found it?
Do Reddit links work here?
https://www.reddit.com/r/climbharder/comments/deepav/thanks_to_all_your_advice_about_a_month_ago_i/
Do Reddit links work here?
https://www.reddit.com/r/climbharder/comments/deepav/thanks_to_all_your_advice_about_a_month_ago_i/
Oof, there is a lot of coping going on in those responses... Even a slight scrape detectable only by snickometer would invalidate an ascent, let alone a dab hard enough to displace a pad.
Makes me wonder what his mates were doing when they saw that? Imagine having friends who only shout encouragement at you when you climb... sounds shit.
"mates" wouldn't let such conduct go unheckled. If that'd been me then footwork, dunnyg, or 36chambers would have leapt and clung onto me, dragging me down onto the pads. That's how I know they care.
REAL mates wouldn’t drag you off - or tell you when you dabbed...
Instead they’d wait until you finish then stand there stoney faced shaking their heads... :)
What do you guys think of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OspaYcSZKe0
Not a dab per say but definitely not the legit ascent claimed... The fun starts at 10:30
Absolutely brilliant!
In a similar vein, this made me chuckle:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B3Z5IG4lBEm/?igshid=7dqixrhpw77g
Been a while since I climbed it, but I’m fairly sure he’s stood on the floor for most of this...Yeah I'm pretty sure that rock isn't connected...
https://www.instagram.com/p/B4zcqw3Dz3H/?igshid=1ohrrmrqalf8n
Absolutely brilliant!He seemed to be a familiar face indeed. You gotta love Louis, I love how his shoes are more polished on the upper side from dragging them on the rock that on the sole.
In a similar vein, this made me chuckle:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B3Z5IG4lBEm/?igshid=7dqixrhpw77g
total WTF at 0:39
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR9sc1aHO_Q
total WTF at 0:39
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YR9sc1aHO_Q
can we start a "to sit or not to sit start" tread?
calling the start at 3:59 a sit start gets me rather aggravated...
just call it a low start, or crouching start.
sit means sit.
A supposed FA as well :lol:
Where were his mates looking at the time? If that was me I would have been dump tackled off the wall.
it looks like he used the mat to perform the movement, bracing against it to give opposition so he could move his foot without barn dooring off :lol: that is a first for me.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6EopEXBi8
Third boulder starts at 1:25 and at 1:35...
https://vimeo.com/161082602
Third boulder starts at 1:25 and at 1:35...
https://vimeo.com/161082602
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6EopEXBi8
Sensational
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RW6EopEXBi8
Sensational
The spotter knows. You can tell.
Third boulder starts at 1:25 and at 1:35...Oh my...
https://vimeo.com/161082602
Oh my...
He actually fell off the boulder there and used the bounce off the mat to get back on. That's the worst one we have had for a while :spank:
Sad to see Filip feature on these pages - the dude is a Font machine, if you want a beta video for anything 7a-7b odds are he has you covered - luckily from the Youtube Text:I'm sorry to have to shatter the illusion but it isn't his first appearance in this thread, in fact there's enough examples for him to have his own thread!
'Unfortunately not everything makes it on camera. With Pieter as my witness, I still repeated it cleanly without dabbing, not long after.'
he could learn a thing or two about properBritishethics!
revenir
(I think that's "back around" in french).
Is it legit to lie on your pad for the first move? Asking for a mate.Shocking that Will and 36C are commenting on the post too and not calling the dab. Maybe they've finally mellowed...
(after he does the stand in the viddy, it is worth waiting for)
https://www.instagram.com/p/CAQj5u9FUtz/?igshid=2zzrtyydk9k9&fbclid=IwAR2pkVnFg8xQNxO_D2wmB39c_UlnBi63JhScXDFXkZMwELj6aX9UnYvlheY (https://www.instagram.com/p/CAQj5u9FUtz/?igshid=2zzrtyydk9k9&fbclid=IwAR2pkVnFg8xQNxO_D2wmB39c_UlnBi63JhScXDFXkZMwELj6aX9UnYvlheY)
On the FA claim too. Back around.
(Bon effort cleaning it, keen to have a look!)
If you turn volume up you can just about hear the dab
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PcCrNZ-ierU
(apologies if a repost)
I reckon if a dog was standing right there listening it might just get kicked out of shot by the force of the DAB.That's a cracker.
I reckon if a dog was standing right there listening it might just get kicked out of shot by the force of the DAB.That's a cracker.
I'm pretty sure his foot dabs the block as he cutsThis.
I'm pretty sure his foot dabs the block as he cutsThis.
Ruthless times we're living in where an ascent is referred to a panel of experts for peer review, waiting weeks or even months for a decision on whether you need to go back around or not.
Ruthless times we're living in where an ascent is referred to a panel of experts for peer review, waiting weeks or even months for a decision on whether you need to go back around or not.
While waiting for track and trace to find witnesses and spotters
Thank goodness we have the smallest cohort ever in Alaska. maybe 10 people operate at that grade :)Ruthless times we're living in where an ascent is referred to a panel of experts for peer review, waiting weeks or even months for a decision on whether you need to go back around or not.
While waiting for track and trace to find witnesses and spotters
Watch out for the false positives
And a friend sent me this recently which I thought was too good not to share further - subtle 'Style Francais' dabbing:
https://youtu.be/Kqt8zJSC9nU?t=32
Simply beautiful:
https://youtu.be/7G4md3fFjik?t=81
And a friend sent me this recently which I thought was too good not to share further - subtle 'Style Francais' dabbing:
https://youtu.be/Kqt8zJSC9nU?t=32
Following Nai's post in YYFY I had to see what Kidney Stone is, which led me to this classic:That is amazing ;D
https://youtu.be/RevrsCTscoM
It's not bad, quite lightweight but isn't that the norm? I reckon andyF will like it.
Decent arsewiper after all that effort.
you know it's a classic when more than half the time on the problem is contorting yourself into the sit-starting position.
What a piece of cinema.I like his childish giggling of success and the cheeky thumbs up at the end ;D
You know the dab is coming. When will it be? THERE IT IS! Will his "friends" remain silent? Will he take the tick? He does!
Only a minute long. Felt like a lifetime with all the suspense. 10/10
Is that one dab or two? He stands on the ground, then lifts his foot to rearrange the mat.
Gratuitous hair dabs here...
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CITmq9YDE8d/?igshid=1x14z2m2e5w0s
Gratuitous hair dabs here...
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CITmq9YDE8d/?igshid=1x14z2m2e5w0s
WOW :smirk:
What's next....Aura Dabs?
Apparently the BMC set up a working group to look at the potential for reporting dabs before they even happened - in a minority report fashion.
Their conclusion was that whilst technologically plausible deciding between pre-meditated and non intentional dabs to be was too close to call. The working group was then re-tasked to examine the effects of historic hob nail boot scars on Napes Needle.
This just in-
A new NHS lab is being set to look into the Genetic predisposition to dab.
The hope being that this debilitating condition can be eradicated with gene therapy in the future.
You can see it coming from a mile off
Wasn't 100% sure, then noticed 'comments are turned off'...:lol: Impropa indeed.
Is that style of spotting a relic from before pads or a French thing?
Bloody hell, a pre-emptive false positive dab call when the climber falls off shortly after. A disgrace.
https://vimeo.com/164833447#t=34s
"t-shirt tucked intothe shorts3/4 length cotton lycra leggings"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVLrlQ_3G-s
Found this whilst reminding myself what The Prow at Portlethen looked like. Small but perfectly formed (and the problem is too.....)
The worst thing about the one Dave posted is that his mates let him get away with it!
A couple of more recent examples of Colorado ethics...
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CWhUIJ2rER-/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpZE_ndms5c
Smellow FA heel dab here... :whip: ;)
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CZuFLUxFkh_/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet
Smellow FA heel dab here... :whip: ;)
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CZuFLUxFkh_/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet
Smellow FA heel dab here... :whip: ;)
https://www.instagram.com/tv/CZuFLUxFkh_/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet
Brilliant!!!
Looking at it again I can't imagine how I mistook his cock for a heel. I suppose a massive cock is some compensation for being homeless....
Massive cock or no, it's still a dab but assuming he went on to do an actual First Ascent at some point so all good ;D
Unexpected comedy gold in the dab thread today
I thought that was the whole point: Joker starts off the block, Ace doesn't?
Sounds like another 'classic' problem thats actually objectively shit to me!
Out of interest, what is and isn't considered ok for the joker? Do you have to step off the block and stop all the swing first?Yes, exactly. You can see why someone was offended enough to flip the start block. I felt slightly conflicted flipping it back into place. A semi-french start on a one move campus problem, doesn't sound like classic or 8A to me.
Yes, exactly. You can see why someone was offended enough to flip the start block. I felt slightly conflicted flipping it back into place. A semi-french start on a one move campus problem to a glued on jug, doesn't sound like classic or 8A to me.
Yes, exactly. You can see why someone was offended enough to flip the start block. I felt slightly conflicted flipping it back into place. A semi-french start on a one move campus problem to a glued on jug, doesn't sound like classic or 8A to me.
A semi-french start on a one move campus problem, doesn't sound like classic or 8A to me.
QuoteA semi-french start on a one move campus problem, doesn't sound like classic or 8A to me.
Don't worry, all is revealed when you do the move. It's pure magic.
I lower on, meaning my leg swings in but I then use the outswing to initiate the move. I couldn't do it if I killed the swing. That video looks fine to me, obviously the left foot on sequence then double catch à la Jerry is better but it's not like he's jumping off the block like I've seen some do.
Don't worry, all is revealed when you do the move. It's pure magic.Looks a bit board climbing for you JB! :-\
Seems we do agree about the merits of a good eliminate after all.QuoteA semi-french start on a one move campus problem, doesn't sound like classic or 8A to me.
Don't worry, all is revealed when you do the move. It's pure magic.
I lower on, meaning my leg swings in but I then use the outswing to initiate the move. I couldn't do it if I killed the swing. That video looks fine to me, obviously the left foot on sequence then double catch à la Jerry is better but it's not like he's jumping off the block like I've seen some do.
https://youtu.be/8v7z4dQcwP8?t=32m27s
This might be a repost but 32:27- 34:10 is a spotter dab masterclass.
Seems we do agree about the merits of a good eliminate after all.
The lesser spotted sport climbing dab.
https://www.instagram.com/p/B42blPsord7/
https://youtu.be/CFDe2RM1Oo4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=181itRBaEss
i've replayed this more times than i should have, because i just could not believe he would take this, as he bailed on a few attempts early on.
the hand the foot slap the rock at almost the same time. but the foot slaps the wrong rock
I never understand why people put pads on boulders when they're clearly going to dab them. Do they think they're going to hurt themselves falling 2 inches onto a smooth block?
even though we cant clearly or obviously see his foot
even though we cant clearly or obviously see his foot
That's not an accident.
Given that he's proudly proclaimed that the video is uncut when it is very clearly two separate pieces of climbing thrown together, it's pretty clear that it's a complete lie.
Of course its a lie, what would you expect from a desperate ex operative wagering his freedom on the chance of freedom in the West.
Later when one of us finds out that it was all a fabrication we will have a solemn walk through the woods to kill our friend with a sniper rifle while he is being held for interrogation.
Later when one of us finds out that it was all a fabrication we will have a solemn walk through the woods to kill our friend with a sniper rifle while he is being held for interrogation.
Later when one of us finds out that it was all a fabrication we will have a solemn walk through the woods to kill our friend with a sniper rifle while he is being held for interrogation.
A former lover, no less.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CdqE3gVDilL/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
Why spot someone is is lower than if they were standing up?
Back around
https://www.instagram.com/p/CdqE3gVDilL/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
Why spot someone is is lower than if they were standing up?
Back around
I can’t speak French so :shrug:'Allez' = keep going; 'Super' = very good.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/TpGA4mvspqQ
A subtle dab but I will take it
In my defence, this was a back-around go to get a vid of the beta :ang:
In my defence, this was a back-around go to get a vid of the beta :ang:
Lost count
https://youtu.be/OMFrJB0tvJE
Lost count
https://youtu.be/OMFrJB0tvJE
Why did no-one issue a warning about the slacklining?
I feel like it's worse because I recognise them as being Yorkshire locals who I would have thought should know better!
Yep been made private. Hopefully lesson learned!
Yep been made private. Hopefully lesson learned!
Let that be a lesson to all of us,bullyingawareness and education does work
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CoIdcnbDRhe/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y= (https://www.instagram.com/reel/CoIdcnbDRhe/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=)Lol. I knew this vid would end up here in short order.
What's the excessive padstack equivalent of a dab?
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CoSrNaCjkeQ/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me like she's using the normal starting holds with straight arms from where she's sat? If so, it would seem rather harsh to think she should be starting any lower!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me like she's using the normal starting holds with straight arms from where she's sat? If so, it would seem rather harsh to think she should be starting any lower!
Seems to be a few videos from girls on grit getting called out at the moment, and I'm not sure calling out a group that are probably marginalised in terms of outdoor climbing is the way to go, even if people are just having a laugh.
Seems to be a few videos from girls on grit getting called out at the moment, and I'm not sure calling out a group that are probably marginalised in terms of outdoor climbing is the way to go, even if people are just having a laugh.
That would be a problem, but I just went back a few pages and only 3 out of the last 12 posts were about women.
Seems to be a few videos from girls on grit getting called out at the moment, and I'm not sure calling out a group that are probably marginalised in terms of outdoor climbing is the way to go, even if people are just having a laugh.
That would be a problem, but I just went back a few pages and only 3 out of the last 12 posts were about women.
Cue the tautological 'the fact that you're denying there's a problem is itself part of the problem' type arguments. Easier to just get on hymn sheet - you're a bad man.
Filth:Does the thread not exist for things like this?
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CoTYWPmNsDl/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link
Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks to me like she's using the normal starting holds with straight arms from where she's sat? If so, it would seem rather harsh to think she should be starting any lower!
^ this!
Just because you can reach most stand start handholds from sitting Bradders
Seems to be a few videos from girls on grit getting called out at the moment, and I'm not sure calling out a group that are probably marginalised in terms of outdoor climbing is the way to go, even if people are just having a laugh.
Bradders has a point. Once a video pops up of someone breaking the rules then everyone copies it. Pointing out the error is the only way to try and address that. I'm not sure whether that applies to this problem as I can't remember. To be honest if you have to start making rules beyond just "start sitting" then it's probably a crap problem.
Think I've said this before in previous threads, IMO specified start holds are often the 'lesser evil' when it comes to a problem and its grade being as close to a level playing field as we can hope to get.
It largely answers the question of how many pads you can start off - as many as you like so long as you pull on with the 'start holds'.
Think I've said this before in previous threads, IMO specified start holds are often the 'lesser evil' when it comes to a problem and its grade being as close to a level playing field as we can hope to get.
It largely answers the question of how many pads you can start off - as many as you like so long as you pull on with the 'start holds'.
It thereby allows the short to pull on, and stops the tall missing moves.
If you think it makes sense for grades to mean as close to the same thing as possible for all climbers than I think it's worth holding your nose, even if you think it makes something objectively silly (sit starts) a little bit more silly.
PS - Are females still a minority in climbing :shrug:? How close to 50% still classes as a minority (technically males are a minority for the whole UK population at 49%)? Presumably minority has an extra dimension in this context other than strict numerical weighting. I think it's fair to say that even if females are at number terms parity with males (I'm not saying they are) that the grading system does not take them 50% into account when 'grading for the average height' :worms:.
On second thoughts, the above is probably the better way to level the playing field and minimise the potential for 'milking the rules' to make life easier for yourself.
It largely answers the question of how many pads you can start off -as many as you like so long as youthe fewest necessary to pull on with the 'start holds'.
Yes, rh low pinch on arete (i.e. below the edge), lh thin undercut. The footblock out right isn't used (obviously).Think I've said this before in previous threads, IMO specified start holds are often the 'lesser evil' when it comes to a problem and its grade being as close to a level playing field as we can hope to get.
It largely answers the question of how many pads you can start off - as many as you like so long as you pull on with the 'start holds'.
It thereby allows the short to pull on, and stops the tall missing moves.
If you think it makes sense for grades to mean as close to the same thing as possible for all climbers than I think it's worth holding your nose, even if you think it makes something objectively silly (sit starts) a little bit more silly.
PS - Are females still a minority in climbing :shrug:? How close to 50% still classes as a minority (technically males are a minority for the whole UK population at 49%)? Presumably minority has an extra dimension in this context other than strict numerical weighting. I think it's fair to say that even if females are at number terms parity with males (I'm not saying they are) that the grading system does not take them 50% into account when 'grading for the average height' :worms:.
While, you're here then, should Blue 48 start from a low arete pinch then, before slapping up to the decent looking RH edge?
Also, should you be rocking over onto the slab or laying off the arete towards the right?
Not tried it yet, but may as well endeavour to 'get it right' when I do...
Cheers.
They're only kidding themselves.This assumes that they haven't logged it somewhere and posted on social media. If either of those happen then they're not only kidding themselves, obviously.
They're only kidding themselves.This assumes that they haven't logged it somewhere and posted on social media. If either of those happen then they're not only kidding themselves, obviously.
I'm intrigued by what your friend found upsetting? The nature of the way the information was delivered, or the information itself? I can sympathize with the former (I guess this is in line with what Liam is saying), but not really with the latter. Or at least I can see that the latter might be upsetting but that doesn't mean that the information shouldn't be delivered; I'd find it upsetting if Stu downgraded all my hard routes, but it makes sense to know what consensus is - if I don't care about grades then I won't care and if I do then I should know what others' opinions are surely?
I'm intrigued by what your friend found upsetting?
Coming from an age before the tinterweb. I have called people out to their face over their cheating, it’s not a difficult thing to do if you believe that they are ruining an activity that’s a massive part of your life.
:agree:They're only kidding themselves.This assumes that they haven't logged it somewhere and posted on social media. If either of those happen then they're not only kidding themselves, obviously.
I'm intrigued by what your friend found upsetting? The nature of the way the information was delivered, or the information itself? I can sympathize with the former (I guess this is in line with what Liam is saying), but not really with the latter. Or at least I can see that the latter might be upsetting but that doesn't mean that the information shouldn't be delivered; I'd find it upsetting if Stu downgraded all my hard routes, but it makes sense to know what consensus is - if I don't care about grades then I won't care and if I do then I should know what others' opinions are surely?
Feels like this thread should go the way of DFB.
Or rename it “Frustrated Dads who like to criticise”. You could then just slag off anyone who didn’t fit your ‘rules’, be it beginners dabbing or women who are too short to reach the starting holds.
To anyone cool with this behaviour, here's a hypothetical: If you were at the same crag as a group of people that you didn't know and hadn't spoken to and one of them was having an attempt on a problem and, on the crux move, cut and hit the mother of all dabs, but otherwise did the problem and topped out to cheers and applause from their mates, would you go over, completely unprompted, and tell them that their ascent wasn't valid? Similarly, if you were in a pub and overheard someone at another table talking about how they'd done a route and it was their first 8a, and you knew that the consensus was that the route is actually a soft 7c+ since a hold fell off, would you feel the need, having not been asked, to tell them? I may be wrong but I genuinely believe that the percentage of people who would do either of those things is far smaller than that of people who would say the same things in a YouTube comment or forum post, despite the fact that the outcome is the same in terms of bringing the achievement into question. And so if you wouldn't do it in person, whether because of social norms, fear of repercussions, or not wanting to be a nob, why is doing it online okay?The difference is that doing it online is doing it in response to someone choosing to publicly broadcast what they are doing - complete with dabs and inflated grades - to a potentially very wide audience. IF the mother of all dabs topped out to cheers and applause from several hundred people, the temptation to tell them their ascent was invalid would be pretty strong. IF the person in the pub was inflating their soft 7c+ to 8a into a loudspeaker to a pub with a thousand people in, then similarly one would be tempted to tell them.
Similarly, if you were in a pub and overheard someone at another table talking about how they'd done a route and it was their first 8a, and you knew that the consensus was that the route is actually a soft 7c+ since a hold fell off, would you feel the need, having not been asked, to tell them?
I'm intrigued by what your friend found upsetting?
I think just the fact that it came from someone that she didn't know, and was the only thing that that person felt was worthy of comment after watching the video, given she'd put quite a lot of effort into it. Anyway, no interest in dragging Dingdong as that would count as public shaming and make me a hypocrite - and besides, I think we've all at some point failed to resist the temptation to write that sort of comment, so not a damning condemnation of him.
To anyone cool with this behaviour, here's a hypothetical: If you were at the same crag as a group of people that you didn't know and hadn't spoken to and one of them was having an attempt on a problem and, on the crux move, cut and hit the mother of all dabs, but otherwise did the problem and topped out to cheers and applause from their mates, would you go over, completely unprompted, and tell them that their ascent wasn't valid? Similarly, if you were in a pub and overheard someone at another table talking about how they'd done a route and it was their first 8a, and you knew that the consensus was that the route is actually a soft 7c+ since a hold fell off, would you feel the need, having not been asked, to tell them? I may be wrong but I genuinely believe that the percentage of people who would do either of those things is far smaller than that of people who would say the same things in a YouTube comment or forum post, despite the fact that the outcome is the same in terms of bringing the achievement into question. And so if you wouldn't do it in person, whether because of social norms, fear of repercussions, or not wanting to be a nob, why is doing it online okay?
Obviously this gets into all kinds of issues relating to the internet and anonymity, but I think it's an important point given a) there's always a real person on the other end of a social-media account and b) that person might be part of a group that is marginalised in the context of climbing and feel even more marginalised as a result of being told that they're 'doing it wrong'. It's patently obvious to UKB posters why a dabbed ascent doesn't count but isn't some sort of universal truth given the arbitrary nature of climbing, so being mocked for not knowing what is genuinely an unwritten rule (so unwritten that this thread is approaching 1000 replies and has posts mocking people for dabbing while climbing eighth-grade problems) might be water off a duck's back for some and a big fat 'fuck off, you're not welcome' to others. The nasty comments on the Girls on Grit posts might mean that fewer videos are posted (anecdotally, my girlfriend said that were she in a position to be recording herself bouldering she wouldn't bother submitting videos in light of that), which might in turn mean fewer women seeing those videos and bouldering outdoors at all.
I disagree with the idea that the information 'needs' to be delivered, and am interested in why; what does it matter to you if someone else dabs, starts off a bunch of stacked mats, or takes the higher, incorrect grade? With that last one even if they take the grade knowing full well that it's soft, how does that affect anyone but them? Yes it might give them false confidence and ultimately slow down their development, but if helping someone to avoid that and generally making sure people start in the right places and off the right number of mats are the best things you might achieve, and marginalising them and making them feel like they shouldn't be climbing is the worst, is it really worth it? To be clear, I agree with Liam - sharing a knowing look with your mate if you're at the crag or sending a screenshot and taking the piss in private are fine, and even some of the finer things in life - but doing so publicly is, like the 'Dead Fit Birds' thread mentioned a while back, really not a good look.
I'm intrigued by what your friend found upsetting?
I think just the fact that it came from someone that she didn't know, and was the only thing that that person felt was worthy of comment after watching the video, given she'd put quite a lot of effort into it. Anyway, no interest in dragging Dingdong as that would count as public shaming and make me a hypocrite - and besides, I think we've all at some point failed to resist the temptation to write that sort of comment, so not a damning condemnation of him.
To anyone cool with this behaviour, here's a hypothetical: If you were at the same crag as a group of people that you didn't know and hadn't spoken to and one of them was having an attempt on a problem and, on the crux move, cut and hit the mother of all dabs, but otherwise did the problem and topped out to cheers and applause from their mates, would you go over, completely unprompted, and tell them that their ascent wasn't valid? Similarly, if you were in a pub and overheard someone at another table talking about how they'd done a route and it was their first 8a, and you knew that the consensus was that the route is actually a soft 7c+ since a hold fell off, would you feel the need, having not been asked, to tell them? I may be wrong but I genuinely believe that the percentage of people who would do either of those things is far smaller than that of people who would say the same things in a YouTube comment or forum post, despite the fact that the outcome is the same in terms of bringing the achievement into question. And so if you wouldn't do it in person, whether because of social norms, fear of repercussions, or not wanting to be a nob, why is doing it online okay?
Obviously this gets into all kinds of issues relating to the internet and anonymity, but I think it's an important point given a) there's always a real person on the other end of a social-media account and b) that person might be part of a group that is marginalised in the context of climbing and feel even more marginalised as a result of being told that they're 'doing it wrong'. It's patently obvious to UKB posters why a dabbed ascent doesn't count but isn't some sort of universal truth given the arbitrary nature of climbing, so being mocked for not knowing what is genuinely an unwritten rule (so unwritten that this thread is approaching 1000 replies and has posts mocking people for dabbing while climbing eighth-grade problems) might be water off a duck's back for some and a big fat 'fuck off, you're not welcome' to others. The nasty comments on the Girls on Grit posts might mean that fewer videos are posted (anecdotally, my girlfriend said that were she in a position to be recording herself bouldering she wouldn't bother submitting videos in light of that), which might in turn mean fewer women seeing those videos and bouldering outdoors at all.
I disagree with the idea that the information 'needs' to be delivered, and am interested in why; what does it matter to you if someone else dabs, starts off a bunch of stacked mats, or takes the higher, incorrect grade? With that last one even if they take the grade knowing full well that it's soft, how does that affect anyone but them? Yes it might give them false confidence and ultimately slow down their development, but if helping someone to avoid that and generally making sure people start in the right places and off the right number of mats are the best things you might achieve, and marginalising them and making them feel like they shouldn't be climbing is the worst, is it really worth it? To be clear, I agree with Liam - sharing a knowing look with your mate if you're at the crag or sending a screenshot and taking the piss in private are fine, and even some of the finer things in life - but doing so publicly is, like the 'Dead Fit Birds' thread mentioned a while back, really not a good look.
Personally I don’t see it much different to all the UKC logs you’ve posted where you call loads of stuff soft, usually because you’re taller and can reach holds smaller climbers can’t reach. Surely we should be thinking about all the short peoples feelings when they feel they’ve achieved something?
If you post publicly for people to see and you title your video “training to climb 7A” or “just sent my 7A project” but you’ve actually climbed a 6C then you can’t be mad if someone publicly replies to your public video and let’s you know that what you’ve climbed isn’t actually 7A. And again, the way I wrote it wasn’t even rude or mean so not much dragging to be done tbh.
I disagree with Fiend's ‘loudspeaker’ idea - that anything that one puts online is being publicly broadcast and thus can and should be critiqued if it contains incorrect information - as I think that many people don’t actually use social media in that way. I think that, in general, when people post on their social-media pages they’re doing so to show off to their mates rather than to tell the world what they’ve done, …
I think that for the most part sticking a post with your send footy up on Instagram is the digital equivalent of going down to the pub and quietly but perhaps not all that humbly informing your mates what you’ve been up to, rather than whipping out a loudspeaker and telling the whole pub.
I'm female. I have started a response to this thread three or four times and then decided against it. The problem is that this debate isn't a bit of a folly or a thought experiment, this is every day life and battles for me, the emotional investment in writing responses to stuff like this can be large.
Women tend to be much more cautious and self critical than men, we tend to avoid situations that can put us in a situation where we may be critiqued. Naomi I relate to everything you have said. We tend to be less confident and value ourselves less. There is science around this. Putting something out there in a space that is intended to support an encourage women and having it smacked down is only going to reinforce all those thoughts and make women less likely to post. Less visibility means less women are likely to get into the sport - we all look for people like us, it's human nature (again there are science studies around this, babies will go to the person that looks most like them).
My experience is that women's participation is increasing but I don't think I have ever been to a crag and been in the majority.
I don't have the resilience or energy to get into a huge conversation about all of this. The main thing I came here to say is if you're interested in this, go have a read of Invisible Women by Caroline Criado Perez - equality is not about numbers, it's about what assumptions are being made based on the use of male as the norm and women are simply small men.
Looks more like one person - who can easily be ignored because they're a gigantalope - posted questioning a bouncy castle pad stack and immediately got smacked down by almost everyone
To anyone cool with this behaviour, here's a hypothetical: If you were at the same crag as a group of people that you didn't know and hadn't spoken to and one of them was having an attempt on a problem and, on the crux move, cut and hit the mother of all dabs, but otherwise did the problem and topped out to cheers and applause from their mates, would you go over, completely unprompted, and tell them that their ascent wasn't valid?
doing so publicly is, like the 'Dead Fit Birds' thread mentioned a while back, really not a good look.
We still haven't gotten to the bottom of whether she started in the right place, which was my only question albeit I admit to taking the piss with my phrasing which maybe isn't the best way of doing it. Then again, humour is often a good way of softening these things so I don't know :shrug:
If people are pro calling out the lady from girls on grit for pad stacking I hope they're planning to call out Tim for pad stacking on cypher....
https://youtu.be/jLTHk49_Osw
This has been a very interesting thread but I think its time to split the topic...dabbing and pad stacking are not the same thing and deserve separate threads. ;)
Surely the actual debate here is relevant to dabbing - it's more about whether we should be publicly "calling people out" when they commit the heinous offence of:If the heinous offence is posted publicly (and ignored / denied / glazed over by the poster), then YES. Don't want to be called out?? Don't do something that isn't climbing the bloody problem and then post publicly about it!!
Dabbing
Taking a higher grade
Using a duff sequence
Pad stacking
Insert infringement of choice
Also this thread has hardly been trying to be kind or informative, it's intent is to laugh for people and essentially make the posters and audience feel better about themselves, otherwise they would private message the people, rather than attempting public ridicule, which I would say (and others I've spoken to about this offline) is bullying.I already addressed this in Tickmark Hall Of Shame and will c'n'p here:
We could go round on this forever clearly, but your arguments for why it's not bullying I and many others would disagree with and perhaps the audience who you don't consider you're bullying should be considered too sometimes.Sure, but I don't see any attempt to refute my arguments (I didn't check what the counter-arguments were in the TMHOS thread but feel free to repost them), so until that happens I will stand by them. FWIW I absolutely hate bullying right from primary school up to online forums these days, and am a strong believer against personally harassing and targeting people themselves - if they're actively posting / opining / promoting something that can be disagreed with or denigrated, THAT thing is the target, not the person themselves (and especially not anything irrelevant to the matter at hand, and anything personal they haven't shared, etc etc - and I've called this out before when someone's physical appearance was mocked in a heated debate).
P.S. Mr Smooth SDS looks fucking logThis is my biggest takeaway from the thread. To quote Noble, "If that's rock climbing I'm not interested" :lol:
In my opinion the arguments for calling people out are ultimately less important than the arguments against, because I don’t think that protecting defined starting positions and grades is worth doing if it has a risk of damaging inclusivity and participation.This is all fine/admirable, but others' may have different opinions on the relative importance of inclusivity vs maintaining the "rules of the game", if that makes sense (see the trans women in sport debate for maximal clashing of priorities around inclusivity vs fairness/rules of the game).
how things are received is more important than how they are intendedThose are not the only two relevant things, surely - there's how things are intended, how they are received, and whether they're "true" or not... and the latter does matter somewhat in most/many contexts surely?
If we consider that dabbing is like being caught offside, then there's no logical argument against this fowl being publically addressed; a referee would still blow their whistle in a womens/trans/disability football match. However, as it stands there is a taboo around breaking climbing rules. Having your first ascent downgraded, or using an incorrect sequence is much more shameful than when the ball accidentally hits a footballers arm. As a community, let's work to break the taboo around the infractions of our game and all this goes away?
Perhaps a useful template message to the next beginner you see dabbing online:
"Hey, great job getting out and giving this boulder some attention, you looked like you were moving well on it. I just wanted to point out that, like in all sports, there are some defined rules and unfortunately many of the rules in climbing are unwritten, but are still a big part of the culture. Your foot skimmed the pad as you were doing move 3 (it's a tricky one isn't it!), and this is called 'dabbing' - think of it like being caught offside! Anyway, I think you'd have done the problem either way so good job, but on your next boulder try to keep those feet up and I look forward to seeing it!"
Obviously, this could be patronising to an intermediate level climber so amend as necessary.
it makes them feel excluded or uncomfortable by the community
Personally I would find this unbelievably patronising and would prefer a simple "you've dabbed at 0.34' or whatever, but thats what the issue is really.
whether they're "true" or not... and the latter does matter somewhat in most/many contexts surely?
....supply bicep emojis....
The sport/cheating analogy is crap for the simple reason that 'cheating' is defined as giving yourself an unfair advantage over an opponent in a competitive environment, but rock climbing isn't competitive (in this context, obviously if Janja dabs she's getting pulled down and rightly so). There's no winning or losing relative to other people because 'the game' isn't you against other people, it's you against an inanimate bit of rock that can't be disadvantaged or lose to you. The only way cheating is a good description of the phenomena we're talking about is if you think that you're competing against others and that the rock is the field of play and grades are trophies that winners get to take home with them, at which point I would say that you're setting yourself up for a bad time and have a fundamentally unhealthy approach to climbing.You don't need a competitor to be able to cheat, you just need rules that can be broken. You can cheat playing Solitaire. You can cheat a Rubix cube like cheque peeling the stickers off. You can cheat at single player video games (up, down, left ,right, A, B, start etc.). You can cheat at climbing boulder problems by not using the defined start holds, using specifically eliminated holds, dabbing, stacking pads more than necessary, climbing an easier variation and claiming to have climbed the harder problem etc. None of these things matter, until you tell somebody else (or the entire Internet) that you've won Solitaire/completed a Rubix cube/climbed a problem. Up to that point, you're only deceiving yourself.
Non competitive sports also rely on rules. For instance runners wishing to do the Bob Graham are expected to complete within 24 hours, gain all the summits, and start/finish at a defined location. Would you suggest to runners that it would be unacceptable to point out breaches of these rules if clearly visible on a publicly claimed BG?
The sport/cheating analogy is crap for the simple reason that 'cheating' is defined as giving yourself an unfair advantage over an opponent in a competitive environment, but rock climbing isn't competitive (in this context, obviously if Janja dabs she's getting pulled down and rightly so). There's no winning or losing relative to other people because 'the game' isn't you against other people, it's you against an inanimate bit of rock that can't be disadvantaged or lose to you.
the internet shouldn't be somewhere where people are simply expected to supply bicep emojis or not say anything.:agree:
there are no hard rules, there is just intention and impact,There is not only intention and impact, and there are some hard - and some less hard - rules in the game of climbing. Imagine if no-one had ever told Jerry you weren't allowed to sit on the gear because they were worried about whether he'd be upset :lol:
You and I might agree that a dabbed ascent doesn't count but the only hard 'truth' there is that it doesn't count for you and I; we can lean on the fact that most climbers would agree with us but that still doesn't constitute an objective truth.Leaving aside a philosophical debate about the nature of truth, if it's not clear that dabbing, starting too high, sitting on the bolt etc are not legit then we clearly need more calling people out, not less. Plus what Bonjoy, Nutty and JB said
The sport/cheating analogy is crap for the simple reason that 'cheating' is defined as giving yourself an unfair advantage over an opponent in a competitive environment, but rock climbing isn't competitive (in this context, obviously if Janja dabs she's getting pulled down and rightly so). There's no winning or losing relative to other people because 'the game' isn't you against other people, it's you against an inanimate bit of rock that can't be disadvantaged or lose to you.
Non competitive sports also rely on rules. For instance runners wishing to do the Bob Graham are expected to complete within 24 hours, gain all the summits, and start/finish at a defined location. Would you suggest to runners that it would be unacceptable to point out breaches of these rules if clearly visible on a publicly claimed BG?
I meant hard rules re. where something crosses the line from reasonable commentary to piss taking to bullying.Ah, that makes more sense! I'd just misunderstood what you meant
I genuinely don't get why anyone would do any differentPeople have told you why - see below. Surely at this point we're just at the stage of agreeing to disagree about whether it's worth pointing these things out, and how worthwhile it is vs the risk of hurt feelings :shrug:
The sport/cheating analogy is crap for the simple reason that 'cheating' is defined as giving yourself an unfair advantage over an opponent in a competitive environment, but rock climbing isn't competitive (in this context, obviously if Janja dabs she's getting pulled down and rightly so). There's no winning or losing relative to other people because 'the game' isn't you against other people, it's you against an inanimate bit of rock that can't be disadvantaged or lose to you.
Non competitive sports also rely on rules. For instance runners wishing to do the Bob Graham are expected to complete within 24 hours, gain all the summits, and start/finish at a defined location. Would you suggest to runners that it would be unacceptable to point out breaches of these rules if clearly visible on a publicly claimed BG?
Based on my hasty googling the Bob Graham has been completed by less than 3000 people who all automatically got membership in an actual club, so while it’s admittedly an arbitrary challenge that someone chooses to take on that has conventions/rules I don’t think the comparison is fair. It seems more similar to 8C or 8C+ -standard bouldering, and I think that we can all agree that at that level scrutiny is to be expected and reasonable (but, as Yetix pointed out, doesn’t always happen - starting off multiple pads in order to reach the start holds doesn't get called into question provided you're climbing 8B). Pretty similar to the Marathon Investigation site, which seems to be going after professionals/sponsored runners winning national-level events rather than average joes.
Scale it down and the equivalent to ClimberDude69's taking the dab in their send footy or sticking an unwarranted plus on the grade in the title would be someone sticking GoPro footage up on YouTube of them cheating in the Scunthorpe half-marathon or even cutting a corner at a park-run - a bit weird and uncool but something that most people wouldn’t challenge because it just doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. And that's assuming that ClimberDude69 decided to lie on purpose rather than just being oblivious.
I was at Bradley Quarry during that lovely crisp cold spell back in December and the slab of the House boulder was totally iced over, but I'd gone there to do Pinch Punch and so had a go. After warming into the moves I had a go and got all the way up to rocking onto the slab, at which point I whacked my heel on a bit of ice and promptly got spat off. I had a quick play on the end and realised that there was no way of doing the problem properly that day, so went home and was happy with what I'd done. I chatted to a couple of people who said that they'd take the tick themselves, but ultimately didn't because I hadn't done the problem as it was originally done, from start to finish. I was happy that I'd got what I wanted out of trying the problem and not bothered about going back specifically to do the same again but with one more easy move to finish, but equally aware that what I'd climbed wasn't actually Pinch Punch. I was there again last weekend and, having done another problem and feeling like I still had plenty of energy, figured I might as well clear up a loose end and do Pinch Punch properly. So I did, and it was nice. It really is a cool problem. Anyway, between those two sessions I saw multiple social-media posts consisting of photos of people on Pinch Punch clearly showing a completely iced-up slab that would have been impossible to rock onto and the standard problem name + green tick, and at no point did I feel compelled to tell those people that they hadn't done Pinch Punch by either my standards or general climbing ones. Instead, I just figured that they'd got what they wanted out of their experience and carried on with my life. This isn't to spray about my climbing or to show what a good little restrained person I am, but because I genuinely don't get why anyone would do any different, in that scenario or any other where the subject of comment is someone's personal climbing which has no bearing on sponsorship or records or anything other than their life and climbing. I watch enough climbing media that I probably see an instance of someone crouch-starting or dabbing or taking an incorrect or spurious grade every few days, and at no point do I feel compelled to do anything more than chuckle to myself, share it with a mate if it's particularly spicy, and carry on with my day. I might think less of them but I do not see a reason to communicate that to them or try and make them think less of themselves, because life is just too short and it's only climbing.
Just popping in to say that people climbing obviously overgraded problems but still taking the grade and propagating it through social media is a far more heinous crime then a cheeky power-shart jet boost off a spotter's face.
The former is very rarely called out and almost always met with protestations when it is.
As you were.
Isn't it the height of elitism to suggest that only higher level challenges warrant/deserve rules or standards, and that everything beneath is too trivial to bother maintaining standards for? My 12 year old son would disagree with you (did Green Trav (no heels) three times as he dabbed the first two times :P)
The sport/cheating analogy is crap for the simple reason that 'cheating' is defined as giving yourself an unfair advantage over an opponent in a competitive environment, but rock climbing isn't competitive (in this context, obviously if Janja dabs she's getting pulled down and rightly so). There's no winning or losing relative to other people because 'the game' isn't you against other people, it's you against an inanimate bit of rock that can't be disadvantaged or lose to you.
Non competitive sports also rely on rules. For instance runners wishing to do the Bob Graham are expected to complete within 24 hours, gain all the summits, and start/finish at a defined location. Would you suggest to runners that it would be unacceptable to point out breaches of these rules if clearly visible on a publicly claimed BG?
Based on my hasty googling the Bob Graham has been completed by less than 3000 people who all automatically got membership in an actual club, so while it’s admittedly an arbitrary challenge that someone chooses to take on that has conventions/rules I don’t think the comparison is fair. It seems more similar to 8C or 8C+ -standard bouldering, and I think that we can all agree that at that level scrutiny is to be expected and reasonable (but, as Yetix pointed out, doesn’t always happen - starting off multiple pads in order to reach the start holds doesn't get called into question provided you're climbing 8B). Pretty similar to the Marathon Investigation site, which seems to be going after professionals/sponsored runners winning national-level events rather than average joes.
Scale it down and the equivalent to ClimberDude69's taking the dab in their send footy or sticking an unwarranted plus on the grade in the title would be someone sticking GoPro footage up on YouTube of them cheating in the Scunthorpe half-marathon or even cutting a corner at a park-run - a bit weird and uncool but something that most people wouldn’t challenge because it just doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. And that's assuming that ClimberDude69 decided to lie on purpose rather than just being oblivious.
I was at Bradley Quarry during that lovely crisp cold spell back in December and the slab of the House boulder was totally iced over, but I'd gone there to do Pinch Punch and so had a go. After warming into the moves I had a go and got all the way up to rocking onto the slab, at which point I whacked my heel on a bit of ice and promptly got spat off. I had a quick play on the end and realised that there was no way of doing the problem properly that day, so went home and was happy with what I'd done. I chatted to a couple of people who said that they'd take the tick themselves, but ultimately didn't because I hadn't done the problem as it was originally done, from start to finish. I was happy that I'd got what I wanted out of trying the problem and not bothered about going back specifically to do the same again but with one more easy move to finish, but equally aware that what I'd climbed wasn't actually Pinch Punch. I was there again last weekend and, having done another problem and feeling like I still had plenty of energy, figured I might as well clear up a loose end and do Pinch Punch properly. So I did, and it was nice. It really is a cool problem. Anyway, between those two sessions I saw multiple social-media posts consisting of photos of people on Pinch Punch clearly showing a completely iced-up slab that would have been impossible to rock onto and the standard problem name + green tick, and at no point did I feel compelled to tell those people that they hadn't done Pinch Punch by either my standards or general climbing ones. Instead, I just figured that they'd got what they wanted out of their experience and carried on with my life. This isn't to spray about my climbing or to show what a good little restrained person I am, but because I genuinely don't get why anyone would do any different, in that scenario or any other where the subject of comment is someone's personal climbing which has no bearing on sponsorship or records or anything other than their life and climbing. I watch enough climbing media that I probably see an instance of someone crouch-starting or dabbing or taking an incorrect or spurious grade every few days, and at no point do I feel compelled to do anything more than chuckle to myself, share it with a mate if it's particularly spicy, and carry on with my day. I might think less of them but I do not see a reason to communicate that to them or try and make them think less of themselves, because life is just too short and it's only climbing.
I never match on the finishing hold of indoor boulders. Never. This way I ensure that I irritate a few people in the gym on every visit, and as they are too polite to call me out they will quietly fume inside. I learned this simple trick from a mountain guide.
I never match on the finishing hold of indoor boulders. Never. This way I ensure that I irritate a few people in the gym on every visit, and as they are too polite to call me out they will quietly fume inside. I learned this simple trick from a mountain guide.
I never match on the finishing hold of indoor boulders. Never. This way I ensure that I irritate a few people in the gym on every visit…
I never match on the finishing hold of indoor boulders. Never. This way I ensure that I irritate a few people in the gym on every visit, and as they are too polite to call me out they will quietly fume inside. I learned this simple trick from a mountain guide.
On problems with contorted first moves; get established on the wall using any old holds, then bring one’s hands to lightly dab the start holds prior to continuing. (This one always seems to boil my piss, and I really shouldn’t care).
around his waste is a chalk bag....
Looks were exchanged in the crowd.
Just popping in to say that people climbing obviously overgraded problems but still taking the grade and propagating it through social media is a far more heinous crime then a cheeky power-shart jet boost off a spotter's face.
The former is very rarely called out and almost always met with protestations when it is.
As you were.
Theres currently a video doing the rounds of someone doing “David” at mother cap - when in reality they’ve traverse left to the easier 6A+ on the arête. Even in their description they mention that they may have gone off route but how excited they were to do their first 7B. These are the kind of things where we should be leaving a comment or messaging them to gently tell them “back around”
Theres currently a video doing the rounds of someone doing “David” at mother cap - when in reality they’ve traverse left to the easier 6A+ on the arête. Even in their description they mention that they may have gone off route but how excited they were to do their first 7B. These are the kind of things where we should be leaving a comment or messaging them to gently tell them “back around”
I know this person and I'm going to quietly discuss it with em but I definitely don't think that I'd ever have that conversation publicly or post their vid to say "look at this!" Etc
Interesting ethical/moral question; if you send a private message and nothing comes of it, is it then ok to comment publicly saying 'to anyone hoping to repeat this problem, this isn't the correct line and has missed out the crux.' ?
The Pebble Wall thing was so prevalent that you'd have spent lots of time on it - I think it was as was mentioned above.I'd always wondered how much the guidebook was to blame on this one (the Total Climbing one). The photo is taken from the side so the lines aren't obvious. I can remember doing the 6C (in error), saying to my mate "there's no way that's 7B" and then trying to the left.
Someone does it (wrong), posts up, others see sees the video...the spiral begins.
It continues to amaze me that people can't tell the difference.
The Pebble Wall thing was so prevalent that you'd have spent lots of time on it - I think it was as was mentioned above.I'd always wondered how much the guidebook was to blame on this one (the Total Climbing one). The photo is taken from the side so the lines aren't obvious. I can remember doing the 6C (in error), saying to my mate "there's no way that's 7B" and then trying to the left.
Someone does it (wrong), posts up, others see sees the video...the spiral begins.
There was a similar misunderstanding when another mate told me he'd done Sewer Rat Connection (7B+) at Almscliff. I said "f**king hell, good effort" as I'd had a couple of sessions on it and was making minimal progress. We ended up at the crag together some months later and he pointed out what he'd done, which definitely wasn't Sewer Rat and was about 7A despite what the Total Climbing guide had to say. It continues to amaze me that people can't tell the difference.
Speaking of Sewer Rat check out this vid, with a criminal level dabNot the best example to use given Jon’s no longer around to defend himself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rITRhlmiLck
Interesting ethical/moral question; if you send a private message and nothing comes of it, is it then ok to comment publicly saying 'to anyone hoping to repeat this problem, this isn't the correct line and has missed out the crux.' ?
My ego would decide. If it's a random problem I've never done and have no intentions of trying then I couldn't care less. If it's my hardest ascent and someone's trying to cheapen it then I'll write War and Peace slating them. Most problems will fall somewhere in the middle ;D
It continues to amaze me that people can't tell the difference.
Ah fair, my bad. Wasn't aware of thatSpeaking of Sewer Rat check out this vid, with a criminal level dabNot the best example to use given Jon’s no longer around to defend himself.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rITRhlmiLck
The Pebble Wall thing was so prevalent that you'd have spent lots of time on it - I think it was as was mentioned above.I'd always wondered how much the guidebook was to blame on this one (the Total Climbing one). The photo is taken from the side so the lines aren't obvious. I can remember doing the 6C (in error), saying to my mate "there's no way that's 7B" and then trying to the left.
Someone does it (wrong), posts up, others see sees the video...the spiral begins.
There was a similar misunderstanding when another mate told me he'd done Sewer Rat Connection (7B+) at Almscliff. I said "f**king hell, good effort" as I'd had a couple of sessions on it and was making minimal progress. We ended up at the crag together some months later and he pointed out what he'd done, which definitely wasn't Sewer Rat and was about 7A despite what the Total Climbing guide had to say. It continues to amaze me that people can't tell the difference.
The Pebble Wall thing was so prevalent that you'd have spent lots of time on it - I think it was as was mentioned above.I'd always wondered how much the guidebook was to blame on this one (the Total Climbing one). The photo is taken from the side so the lines aren't obvious. I can remember doing the 6C (in error), saying to my mate "there's no way that's 7B" and then trying to the left.
Someone does it (wrong), posts up, others see sees the video...the spiral begins.
There was a similar misunderstanding when another mate told me he'd done Sewer Rat Connection (7B+) at Almscliff. I said "f**king hell, good effort" as I'd had a couple of sessions on it and was making minimal progress. We ended up at the crag together some months later and he pointed out what he'd done, which definitely wasn't Sewer Rat and was about 7A despite what the Total Climbing guide had to say. It continues to amaze me that people can't tell the difference.
It amazes me that people can! A lot of grading is (imo) utterly nonsensical. Especially on grit.
...this is because people don't make any effort to challenge the FA's grade any more.
Excuse my complaining. I was slightly triggered in this regard at the weekend and still not over it.
The Pebble Wall thing was so prevalent that you'd have spent lots of time on it - I think it was as was mentioned above.I'd always wondered how much the guidebook was to blame on this one (the Total Climbing one). The photo is taken from the side so the lines aren't obvious. I can remember doing the 6C (in error), saying to my mate "there's no way that's 7B" and then trying to the left.
Someone does it (wrong), posts up, others see sees the video...the spiral begins.
There was a similar misunderstanding when another mate told me he'd done Sewer Rat Connection (7B+) at Almscliff. I said "f**king hell, good effort" as I'd had a couple of sessions on it and was making minimal progress. We ended up at the crag together some months later and he pointed out what he'd done, which definitely wasn't Sewer Rat and was about 7A despite what the Total Climbing guide had to say. It continues to amaze me that people can't tell the difference.
It amazes me that people can! A lot of grading is (imo) utterly nonsensical. Especially on grit.
If you're climbing on problems which have been recently developed or had little traffic then this is because people don't make any effort to challenge the FA's grade any more.
It's crazy that when people get consistently shut down by a particular grade then flash or otherwise piss a climb given that grade they don't seem to stop and wonder whether the grade could be wrong, especially on relatively new stuff.
Excuse my complaining. I was slightly triggered in this regard at the weekend and still not over it.
Excuse my complaining. I was slightly triggered in this regard at the weekend and still not over it.
It’s ok Will this is a safe space, tell us where the bad man misgraded
people don't make any effort to challenge the FA's grade any more.
Oh my god I've just seen Girls On Grit has posted a video of Whisky Galore. Will Hunt baiting as its finest surely.
...that's a great help example on NOT to discuss starting holds on a sit start on a page set up for girls on grit. Back around :chair:
if you can't reach the 'standard' sit-start handholds, then I guess you could claim it as a low start on defined holds or something else - whatever, but do acknowledge the higher start point (of your arse).
don't claim a sit start of any specific grade if you're not sitting on the ground
don't claim a sit start of any specific grade if you're not sitting on the ground.
...that's a great help example on NOT to discuss starting holds on a sit start on a page set up for girls on grit. Back around :chair:
Hi, I guess all I can add at this point some way down the thread is to reassure you that I stand by my original comment on IG. I'm in the minority, clearly, in choosing to comment at all and in not sugar-coating my feedback. I'm fine with that. People have diverse views which are often interesting to hear, as long as we avoid personal attacks and stick to commenting on the moves and style.
To recap:
1. If you're a grown-up climbing instructor posting on your professional account, setting an example to the masses of less-experienced climbers of whatever gender, then don't claim a sit start of any specific grade if you're not sitting on the ground. As discussed up thread, if you can't reach the 'standard' sit-start handholds, then I guess you could claim it as a low start on defined holds or something else - whatever, but do acknowledge the higher start point (of your arse).
2. What gives me the right to comment on a female beta page? The platform is open to all to comment - engagement is literally what drives it.
don't claim a sit start of any specific grade if you're not sitting on the ground.
This is such a weird and pointlessly strict rule. Almost nobody abides by this.
don't claim a sit start of any specific grade if you're not sitting on the ground.
This is such a weird and pointlessly strict rule. Almost nobody abides by this.
Nobody except the OP, surely? I have literally never heard of the idea that a sit start only counts if your arse is on the muddy/stony/sandy/shitty ground today. I've never done a sit start apparently.
Good historical knowledge, but To replicate it today would be an anachronism except where required (eg when there is no space for both pad and arse).
Cause the protection has improved ; I gather the arse on the ground advice was pre pads right? Obviously a towel is fine for cleaning your boots and not getting mud on your arse, but it wouldn't be a lot of good for falling on. (I know I know, weren't the oldies hard etc etc).
For me pads, like sticky rubber, are progress. Seems dumb to not move on when 99%+ of other climbers have?
I wonder what the bum on the sand bleausards do now on problems where the landings have been eroded down by half a metre!
Good historical knowledge, but To replicate it today would be an anachronism except where required (eg when there is no space for both pad and arse).
At the risk of asking the obvious: why?
No argument over the thickness of a towel as there is with a pad - a towel is a towel give or take a few mm. It provides a much more level playing field than a pad.. It keeps your ass clean and dry. Be honest - you don't 'need' a pad to sit on to start a boulder problem to make it a bearable proposition, its not like there are razers on the ground unless you boulder at the Breck.
Sorry for being sensible. Carry on finding ways to cheat :)
Sit starts without crash pad are still a thing in Font. I suspect they use sit start pads or towels....
A presumably recent example.
https://bleau.info/marion/309115.html
Sit starts without crash pad are still a thing in Font. I suspect they use sit start pads or towels....
A presumably recent example.
https://bleau.info/marion/309115.html
Just an example here, but the description "sit start without crashpad" is a very common thing to see when browsing bleau.info...Yet in the video he starts kneeling :lol:
https://bleau.info/apremontsanglier/302391.html
I can't think of a single boulder problem I've tried where a mandated* sit start improved the quality of the problem over a hypothetical low start using the same starting holds. Difficulty yes, quality no.
*sometimes a sit start might actually be easier than a crouch by allowing you to get under the holds better. In this scenario, starting sitting doesn't need to be a rule.
I can't think of a single boulder problem I've tried where a mandated* sit start improved the quality of the problem over a hypothetical low start using the same starting holds. Difficulty yes, quality no.
*sometimes a sit start might actually be easier than a crouch by allowing you to get under the holds better. In this scenario, starting sitting doesn't need to be a rule.
Any problem that starts sitting is better quality in my terms than low or crouching… that’s because my knees are fucked and sitting down is better than crouched. I actually think crouching starts are generally less satisfying than sitting.
There have been loads of thoughtful responses here and I think that's all to the good - I’m alright with being told that I’m full of shit and having holes in arguments pointed out. But there have also been a lot of comedy bits based on stereotypes of blue-haired American uni students screaming that they can identify as whatever they want and general mocking of ideas like victimisation and safe spaces and privilege that were never part of the discussion in the first place, in response to a basic argument that women in a male-dominated environment might be bothered by things that men aren’t bothered by. Obviously that’s to be expected because this is an online forum and it's much more fun than writing walls of text, but it probably also explains why in this whole discussion there have only been two contributors who have said that they’re women.
There have been loads of thoughtful responses here and I think that's all to the good - I’m alright with being told that I’m full of shit and having holes in arguments pointed out. But there have also been a lot of comedy bits based on stereotypes of blue-haired American uni students screaming that they can identify as whatever they want and general mocking of ideas like victimisation and safe spaces and privilege that were never part of the discussion in the first place, in response to a basic argument that women in a male-dominated environment might be bothered by things that men aren’t bothered by. Obviously that’s to be expected because this is an online forum and it's much more fun than writing walls of text, but it probably also explains why in this whole discussion there have only been two contributors who have said that they’re women.
There have been loads of thoughtful responses here and I think that's all to the good - I’m alright with being told that I’m full of shit and having holes in arguments pointed out. But there have also been a lot of comedy bits based on stereotypes of blue-haired American uni students screaming that they can identify as whatever they want and general mocking of ideas like victimisation and safe spaces and privilege that were never part of the discussion in the first place, in response to a basic argument that women in a male-dominated environment might be bothered by things that men aren’t bothered by. Obviously that’s to be expected because this is an online forum and it's much more fun than writing walls of text, but it probably also explains why in this whole discussion there have only been two contributors who have said that they’re women.
I “did” l’aerodynamite off a 3 pad stack and my friend, who can easily reach more than pad higher than me, “did” it off two. I’m just wondering who’s not done it the most?
I “did” l’aerodynamite off a 3 pad stack and my friend, who can easily reach more than pad higher than me, “did” it off two. I’m just wondering who’s not done it the most?
You.
Friend = -2p
You = -3p
You have failed -3/-2 = 150% more than (s)he has.
Start holds should absolutely be defined where they're not patently obvious.
Different variations of a problem should be given defined grades. for example:
Help the Young - 7A+ (French start)
Help the Young Stand Start - 7B+
Help the Young Sit Start - 7C+
Help the Young Sit Start (No Foot Block) - 8A
In a perfect world, I'd prefer the purest and fullest line to be the one that gets the name, and all the others are lesser variations. This would make the 8A version simply 'Help the Young' in my book. However, it's likely the easiest version of a problem will get done and be named first.
In a perfect world, I'd prefer the purest and fullest line to be the one that gets the name, and all the others are lesser variations.
Start holds should absolutely be defined where they're not patently obvious.
Different variations of a problem should be given defined grades. for example:
Help the Young - 7A+ (French start)
Help the Young Stand Start - 7B+
Help the Young Sit Start - 7C+
Help the Young Sit Start (No Foot Block) - 8A
In a perfect world, I'd prefer the purest and fullest line to be the one that gets the name, and all the others are lesser variations. This would make the 8A version simply 'Help the Young' in my book. However, it's likely the easiest version of a problem will get done and be named first.
In a perfect world, I'd prefer the purest and fullest line to be the one that gets the name, and all the others are lesser variations.
Sometimes this will be the case but most of the time it's the opposite for me.
Take the Shelterstone. The problems that start on that great big sidepull jug (Ned's, The Groove) are natural stand starts. The sit adds unpleasant and incongruously difficult climbing. If it were my guide I'd have described them as stands with the sit starts being a note in the text or on a separate line.
There's at least one FA that I've done where I only bothered persisting with the sit start so that some idiot didn't do it later and claim it as an improvement to the original stand. The one that springs to mind is Emerald Arete at Ruin Bank which is a really nice 6A or a 7A sit which might have been good were the crux not having to climb it in such a way as to avoid a dab.
The arete to the left is another example. Sitting (padless) on the block to start makes it a bit harder (weird body positiony pull on) but adds no quality, just mindless difficulty to a perfectly logical stand start. (Incidentally when I recorded the sit I somehow preempted Si Witcher and said "Start with the bones of your arse on the block (the short may use a booster seat on the block, but don't take the mick)."
https://www.instagram.com/p/CNo1WgOD8Dy/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
https://www.instagram.com/p/CNk4SgljrqV/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
Take the Shelterstone. The problems that start on that great big sidepull jug (Ned's, The Groove) are natural stand starts. The sit adds unpleasant and incongruously difficult climbing.
I've been wavering on commenting on this thread but I think it's useful to contribute my perspective.
I spent most of my childhood and teenage years being bullied pretty badly for social awkwardness and none-conformity (I suspect due to undiagnosed ADHD amongst other things) and as a result have taken some time to come around to the concept of an enjoyable piss-taking/light mockery amongst friends and acquaintances.
However with that in mind though I've come to see it as a useful and funny part of the social experience - but within certain boundaries which avoid causing misunderstanding and emotional escalation/damage.
For me this works in the following context:
1) You must always have some level of pre-existing personal relationship with the person you're sharing the piss taking with, whether they are the subject of the piss taking or are joking with you about someone else is is the subject.
2) If the piss taking is happening in a public setting, then the subject should be present and taking part in the discussion. If the person is not 'present' then the discussion should not be public.
3) If the subject cannot be guaranteed to be present then the nature of the joking needs to be kept within appropriate boundaries. And easy filter for this is if you would feel comfortable saying what you're writing directly to the face of someone who you've never met previously and without context. If you're someone who typically struggles to read social cues then it's best to be more cautious.
If the piss taking strays outside of these contexts then it's mockery/bullying because the useful and enjoyable social element is lost to one or more of the parties involved and it becomes destructive rather than constructive.
The issue with this current discussion (and in a gentler sense, the overall tone of this thread - but I respect that there is nuance with anything that someone has openly published online) is that it's public but unable to meet rule two and is crossing the line on rule three. This is a difficult situation because most people here are making the valid point that there is a useful component to the information delivered and that using humour as a mechanism to deliver it is a good way to do so.
The key is to make sure that the subject of the social error can feel a little embarrassed but still see the funny side which allows for constructive social growth and group learning as opposed to ostracisation. This then strengthens both the message and the social dynamic.
Happy to be called out but that's my perspective as someone who learnt to love a little fun-poking later in life after much unhappiness.
I am not entirely sure how well this suits to this thread, but there is also the issue of which starting holds you start with when you climb a non-sit climb,
for example,
The rib in burbage south: you can start like in the attached pic: https://ibb.co/bXhdhYz
basically right hand on the high crimp and start heel on, this will make the problem around V4-5 for me. But that crimp from ground is only accessible when you are taller.
If you do it with other starting holds, for me it felt much harder to the extent that I've never crimped so hard on grit.
I have more examples like that :o
should a 2030 guidebook be a digital app that shows every climb outside like it is a board climb with predefined feet and hands, or will we be ok as a community that there are plenty of climbs where taller climbers will be able to start with higher holds that give them pretty good advance sometimes, to the extent of skipping the crux.
this thread coule be renamed to be a bit wider, 'bring out the pitchforks'
AKA every trip to Font pre-smartphones / Gite wi-fi when you thought you'd done something hard.
Start holds should absolutely be defined where they're not patently obvious.
Different variations of a problem should be given defined grades. for example:
Help the Young - 7A+ (French start)
Help the Young Stand Start - 7B+
Help the Young Sit Start - 7C+
Help the Young Sit Start (No Foot Block) - 8A
In a perfect world, I'd prefer the purest and fullest line to be the one that gets the name, and all the others are lesser variations. This would make the 8A version simply 'Help the Young' in my book. However, it's likely the easiest version of a problem will get done and be named first.
Surely it would be help the young 7C+ With footblock otherwise it’s an eliminate and shit according to a lot of people who frequent this forum ;D
Start holds should absolutely be defined where they're not patently obvious.
Different variations of a problem should be given defined grades. for example:
Help the Young - 7A+ (French start)
Help the Young Stand Start - 7B+
Help the Young Sit Start - 7C+
Help the Young Sit Start (No Foot Block) - 8A
In a perfect world, I'd prefer the purest and fullest line to be the one that gets the name, and all the others are lesser variations. This would make the 8A version simply 'Help the Young' in my book. However, it's likely the easiest version of a problem will get done and be named first.
Surely it would be help the young 7C+ With footblock otherwise it’s an eliminate and shit according to a lot of people who frequent this forum ;D
The ‘footblock’ wasn’t used on the FA as it was pretty obvious to me it was part of the floor. If you want to include the ground for your sit start footholds go ahead, but you only get the grade for the stand surely?
Start holds should absolutely be defined where they're not patently obvious.
Different variations of a problem should be given defined grades. for example:
Help the Young - 7A+ (French start)
Help the Young Stand Start - 7B+
Help the Young Sit Start - 7C+
Help the Young Sit Start (No Foot Block) - 8A
In a perfect world, I'd prefer the purest and fullest line to be the one that gets the name, and all the others are lesser variations. This would make the 8A version simply 'Help the Young' in my book. However, it's likely the easiest version of a problem will get done and be named first.
Surely it would be help the young 7C+ With footblock otherwise it’s an eliminate and shit according to a lot of people who frequent this forum ;D
The ‘footblock’ wasn’t used on the FA as it was pretty obvious to me it was part of the floor. If you want to include the ground for your sit start footholds go ahead, but you only get the grade for the stand surely?
I’m personally fine with eliminating stuff to make a climb harder but to me that footblock very much looks like it’s part of the rock? Either way it was more of a commentary on how people on here complain and say that you can’t have eliminates on grit otherwise it’s a shit problem (I do not agree with them)
Start holds should absolutely be defined where they're not patently obvious.
Different variations of a problem should be given defined grades. for example:
Help the Young - 7A+ (French start)
Help the Young Stand Start - 7B+
Help the Young Sit Start - 7C+
Help the Young Sit Start (No Foot Block) - 8A
In a perfect world, I'd prefer the purest and fullest line to be the one that gets the name, and all the others are lesser variations. This would make the 8A version simply 'Help the Young' in my book. However, it's likely the easiest version of a problem will get done and be named first.
Surely it would be help the young 7C+ With footblock otherwise it’s an eliminate and shit according to a lot of people who frequent this forum ;D
The ‘footblock’ wasn’t used on the FA as it was pretty obvious to me it was part of the floor. If you want to include the ground for your sit start footholds go ahead, but you only get the grade for the stand surely?
I’m personally fine with eliminating stuff to make a climb harder but to me that footblock very much looks like it’s part of the rock? Either way it was more of a commentary on how people on here complain and say that you can’t have eliminates on grit otherwise it’s a shit problem (I do not agree with them)
It’s below the floor level to the right, and originally there was a loose block which made the right even higher. I really gave it no consideration, it just seemed obvious to me that the break formed a natural dividing line to the extent I didn’t include a rule in the write up, and was surprised when people started using it. Sit starts are contrived, and this is is not unusual.
Let’s not forget that dabs are not primarily caused by climbers, but by shit lowballs. If the crux is avoiding the floor there are probably better uses for your time.
Let’s not forget that dabs are not primarily caused by climbers, but by shit lowballs. If the crux is avoiding the floor there are probably better uses for your time.
Maybe it’s time to stop calling things crap just because you don’t enjoy them?
I would also say the sit without footblock to help the young is dabby as you have to do a pull up in compression and avoid scraping the floor as you move up the arête?
Also if people naturally use a footblock then maybe it was dumb to eliminate it but then not be more expressive about the rules?
Sorry to disagree but a crux being avoiding a dab just means you need to use your core to avoid the floor or an object which can be just as valid as any other crux such as moving between positions or holding a bad hold.
Sorry to disagree but a crux being avoiding a dab just means you need to use your core to avoid the floor or an object which can be just as valid as any other crux such as moving between positions or holding a bad hold.
This is just one example but I'm honestly despairing of where climbing is at the moment when it comes to how we guage quality.
I've been wavering on commenting on this thread but I think it's useful to contribute my perspective.Ooops skimmed over this before but worth replying to as unlike some of the other responses it's an actual attempt to analyse bullying and look at boundaries and rationale and form a coherent argument.
I spent most of my childhood and teenage years being bullied pretty badly for social awkwardness and none-conformity (I suspect due to undiagnosed ADHD amongst other things) and as a result have taken some time to come around to the concept of an enjoyable piss-taking/light mockery amongst friends and acquaintances.
However with that in mind though I've come to see it as a useful and funny part of the social experience - but within certain boundaries which avoid causing misunderstanding and emotional escalation/damage.
For me this works in the following context:
1) You must always have some level of pre-existing personal relationship with the person you're sharing the piss taking with, whether they are the subject of the piss taking or are joking with you about someone else is is the subject.
2) If the piss taking is happening in a public setting, then the subject should be present and taking part in the discussion. If the person is not 'present' then the discussion should not be public.
3) If the subject cannot be guaranteed to be present then the nature of the joking needs to be kept within appropriate boundaries. And easy filter for this is if you would feel comfortable saying what you're writing directly to the face of someone who you've never met previously and without context. If you're someone who typically struggles to read social cues then it's best to be more cautious.
If the piss taking strays outside of these contexts then it's mockery/bullying because the useful and enjoyable social element is lost to one or more of the parties involved and it becomes destructive rather than constructive.
The issue with this current discussion (and in a gentler sense, the overall tone of this thread - but I respect that there is nuance with anything that someone has openly published online) is that it's public but unable to meet rule two and is crossing the line on rule three. This is a difficult situation because most people here are making the valid point that there is a useful component to the information delivered and that using humour as a mechanism to deliver it is a good way to do so.
The key is to make sure that the subject of the social error can feel a little embarrassed but still see the funny side which allows for constructive social growth and group learning as opposed to ostracisation. This then strengthens both the message and the social dynamic.
Happy to be called out but that's my perspective as someone who learnt to love a little fun-poking later in life after much unhappiness.
Sorry to disagree but a crux being avoiding a dab just means you need to use your core to avoid the floor or an object which can be just as valid as any other crux such as moving between positions or holding a bad hold.
This is just one example but I'm honestly despairing of where climbing is at the moment when it comes to how we guage quality.
Quality is a spectrum will. You can have very good quality stuff, meh quality stuff and shit quality stuff. No one said a boulder with a dabby potential is a 3 star line but It doesn’t mean you shouldn’t climb it just because of that. Also I’ve seen a few of your FAs and some have some pretty dabby sections yet you still cleaned and did them so where does that leave you in this argument?
Sorry to disagree but a crux being avoiding a dab just means you need to use your core to avoid the floor or an object which can be just as valid as any other crux such as moving between positions or holding a bad hold.
This is just one example but I'm honestly despairing of where climbing is at the moment when it comes to how we guage quality.
Quality is a spectrum will. You can have very good quality stuff, meh quality stuff and shit quality stuff. No one said a boulder with a dabby potential is a 3 star line but It doesn’t mean you shouldn’t climb it just because of that. Also I’ve seen a few of your FAs and some have some pretty dabby sections yet you still cleaned and did them so where does that leave you in this argument?
Maybe I've misunderstood. I read that as JB saying that dabbiness seriously compromises quality and you saying that it didn't. I agree that a dabby move doesn't necessarily make something complete shit, but it will normally make something much much less worthwhile. I'd expect that most stuff I've written up where the hard bit is not dabbing would be written up accordingly.
Sorry to disagree but a crux being avoiding a dab just means you need to use your core to avoid the floor or an object which can be just as valid as any other crux such as moving between positions or holding a bad hold.
This is just one example but I'm honestly despairing of where climbing is at the moment when it comes to how we guage quality.
Quality is a spectrum will. You can have very good quality stuff, meh quality stuff and shit quality stuff. No one said a boulder with a dabby potential is a 3 star line but It doesn’t mean you shouldn’t climb it just because of that. Also I’ve seen a few of your FAs and some have some pretty dabby sections yet you still cleaned and did them so where does that leave you in this argument?
Maybe I've misunderstood. I read that as JB saying that dabbiness seriously compromises quality and you saying that it didn't. I agree that a dabby move doesn't necessarily make something complete shit, but it will normally make something much much less worthwhile. I'd expect that most stuff I've written up where the hard bit is not dabbing would be written up accordingly.
All good. My point was that the dabbyness of a climb can be just as much of a crux as any other type of move and doesn’t mean a climb isn’t worth doing, regardless of quality. But there are 2/3 star lines out there that can have dabby elements too.
Steep Traverse at Plantation springs to mind as a 3* problem where the crux is not dabbing.
Just catching up on the recent and not-so-recent fun. So let me get this right.
In terms of gender and dab / pad-stack shaming, the previous stats were 2 out of 13 previous shames were women compared to men (of which one was refuted anyway)??
b) that they were outside of the M25 for a few hours?
A super soft 6C at the Plantation. Would it stretch the imagination to suppose that the 3-star voters were blinded to the climb's objective quality by a) the fact that it's their first 6C, and b) that they were outside of the M25 for a few hours?
:fishing:
Sorry but what. Steep traverse isn’t super soft :lol: not sure what you been smoking will but share it with the rest of us.
The Sheriff at Woodhouse is worth doing but the lowballness ruins it. Would be very very good if it was the height of Demon Wall Roof. As it is its merely worth doing when you're there. (there you go Fiend, someone had to).
Ultimately this is now an aesthetic discussion, and I'm on Will, Fiend and JBs side. The rest of you bloody boulderers have no taste. Dabbiness not being a sign of shitness but instead recast as a chance to use your abripperx honed core? Grim sit starts with a rancid first move miles harder than the rest are now powerful and tensiony? We're through the looking glass here :tease:
I'm on Will, Fiend and JBs side.
You can take my place. Being lumped in with Will is about the worst insult I've taken on here. In fact I might have to call spidermonkey09 out for bullying for that :chair:I'm on Will, Fiend and JBs side.
What an unholy alliance. Where can I sign up
The Sheriff at Woodhouse is worth doing but the lowballness ruins it. Would be very very good if it was the height of Demon Wall Roof. As it is its merely worth doing when you're there. (there you go Fiend, someone had to).
Ultimately this is now an aesthetic discussion, and I'm on Will, Fiend and JBs side. The rest of you bloody boulderers have no taste. Dabbiness not being a sign of shitness but instead recast as a chance to use your abripperx honed core? Grim sit starts with a rancid first move miles harder than the rest are now powerful and tensiony? We're through the looking glass here :tease:
In case anyone isn't sure...
Seriously though, dab's a dab and if I see one I'm calling it out :shrug:
Steep Traverse at Plantation springs to mind as a 3* problem where the crux is not dabbing.
I've been wavering on commenting on this thread but I think it's useful to contribute my perspective.Ooops skimmed over this before but worth replying to as unlike some of the other responses it's an actual attempt to analyse bullying and look at boundaries and rationale and form a coherent argument.
I spent most of my childhood and teenage years being bullied pretty badly for social awkwardness and none-conformity (I suspect due to undiagnosed ADHD amongst other things) and as a result have taken some time to come around to the concept of an enjoyable piss-taking/light mockery amongst friends and acquaintances.
However with that in mind though I've come to see it as a useful and funny part of the social experience - but within certain boundaries which avoid causing misunderstanding and emotional escalation/damage.
For me this works in the following context:
1) You must always have some level of pre-existing personal relationship with the person you're sharing the piss taking with, whether they are the subject of the piss taking or are joking with you about someone else is is the subject.
2) If the piss taking is happening in a public setting, then the subject should be present and taking part in the discussion. If the person is not 'present' then the discussion should not be public.
3) If the subject cannot be guaranteed to be present then the nature of the joking needs to be kept within appropriate boundaries. And easy filter for this is if you would feel comfortable saying what you're writing directly to the face of someone who you've never met previously and without context. If you're someone who typically struggles to read social cues then it's best to be more cautious.
If the piss taking strays outside of these contexts then it's mockery/bullying because the useful and enjoyable social element is lost to one or more of the parties involved and it becomes destructive rather than constructive.
The issue with this current discussion (and in a gentler sense, the overall tone of this thread - but I respect that there is nuance with anything that someone has openly published online) is that it's public but unable to meet rule two and is crossing the line on rule three. This is a difficult situation because most people here are making the valid point that there is a useful component to the information delivered and that using humour as a mechanism to deliver it is a good way to do so.
The key is to make sure that the subject of the social error can feel a little embarrassed but still see the funny side which allows for constructive social growth and group learning as opposed to ostracisation. This then strengthens both the message and the social dynamic.
Happy to be called out but that's my perspective as someone who learnt to love a little fun-poking later in life after much unhappiness.
Good post, good argument, but it misses the key factor that the subject has deliberately chosen to post (or promote) media to an unlimited public audience showing their dabbing (or whatever). That very public showing I think negates some of your criteria, and makes it quite different to bullying about non-promoted issues. I doubt anyone would advocate trying to hack into someone's private videos or scroll through their phone to find unshared photos to then publicly highlight the subject's dabbing!!
Edit: Okay this video is unlisted, but JF :shit: , WTF did a skinny cunt 65kg waif need to lie down for a rest on this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAnGpxBMZZk
With Instagram's terrible search algorithm, hashtags are the only way to make it possible for people to find beta videos for problems at smaller crags or recently developed crags/problems. I wish it was standard to include the crag and problem name as hashtags.
Climbingismypassion etc can get in the bin.
I hate to agree with Will on downgrades but Steep Traverse is nowhere close to 6C. Maybe it might have made sense as a grade 30 years ago(?) when the average 6C climber would have had little experience of very steep climbing. Now that everyone learns to climb on a juggy roof indoors, 6C is a joke.
As far as bullying goes there has been bullying on this site while I've been here. I think it's an important thing to talk about.
With Instagram's terrible search algorithm, hashtags are the only way to make it possible for people to find beta videos for problems at smaller crags or recently developed crags/problems. I wish it was standard to include the crag and problem name as hashtags.
Climbingismypassion etc can get in the bin.
I hate to agree with Will on downgrades but Steep Traverse is nowhere close to 6C. Maybe it might have made sense as a grade 30 years ago(?) when the average 6C climber would have had little experience of very steep climbing. Now that everyone learns to climb on a juggy roof indoors, 6C is a joke.
That doesn't make sense. It might be the case that there are more people who can do 6C in that style these days, but that doesn't mean it isn't 6C. Or are we upgrading all the smeary slabs too?
That is exactly what it means. We grade problems based on how difficult they are for the average climber to climb them. As the average skillset changes, so does the grade.I hate to agree with Will on downgrades but Steep Traverse is nowhere close to 6C. Maybe it might have made sense as a grade 30 years ago(?) when the average 6C climber would have had little experience of very steep climbing. Now that everyone learns to climb on a juggy roof indoors, 6C is a joke.
That doesn't make sense. It might be the case that there are more people who can do 6C in that style these days, but that doesn't mean it isn't 6C.
I've been wavering on commenting on this thread but I think it's useful to contribute my perspective.Ooops skimmed over this before but worth replying to as unlike some of the other responses it's an actual attempt to analyse bullying and look at boundaries and rationale and form a coherent argument.
I spent most of my childhood and teenage years being bullied pretty badly for social awkwardness and none-conformity (I suspect due to undiagnosed ADHD amongst other things) and as a result have taken some time to come around to the concept of an enjoyable piss-taking/light mockery amongst friends and acquaintances.
However with that in mind though I've come to see it as a useful and funny part of the social experience - but within certain boundaries which avoid causing misunderstanding and emotional escalation/damage.
For me this works in the following context:
1) You must always have some level of pre-existing personal relationship with the person you're sharing the piss taking with, whether they are the subject of the piss taking or are joking with you about someone else is is the subject.
2) If the piss taking is happening in a public setting, then the subject should be present and taking part in the discussion. If the person is not 'present' then the discussion should not be public.
3) If the subject cannot be guaranteed to be present then the nature of the joking needs to be kept within appropriate boundaries. And easy filter for this is if you would feel comfortable saying what you're writing directly to the face of someone who you've never met previously and without context. If you're someone who typically struggles to read social cues then it's best to be more cautious.
If the piss taking strays outside of these contexts then it's mockery/bullying because the useful and enjoyable social element is lost to one or more of the parties involved and it becomes destructive rather than constructive.
The issue with this current discussion (and in a gentler sense, the overall tone of this thread - but I respect that there is nuance with anything that someone has openly published online) is that it's public but unable to meet rule two and is crossing the line on rule three. This is a difficult situation because most people here are making the valid point that there is a useful component to the information delivered and that using humour as a mechanism to deliver it is a good way to do so.
The key is to make sure that the subject of the social error can feel a little embarrassed but still see the funny side which allows for constructive social growth and group learning as opposed to ostracisation. This then strengthens both the message and the social dynamic.
Happy to be called out but that's my perspective as someone who learnt to love a little fun-poking later in life after much unhappiness.
Good post, good argument, but it misses the key factor that the subject has deliberately chosen to post (or promote) media to an unlimited public audience showing their dabbing (or whatever). That very public showing I think negates some of your criteria, and makes it quite different to bullying about non-promoted issues. I doubt anyone would advocate trying to hack into someone's private videos or scroll through their phone to find unshared photos to then publicly highlight the subject's dabbing!!
Edit: Okay this video is unlisted, but JF :shit: , WTF did a skinny cunt 65kg waif need to lie down for a rest on this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAnGpxBMZZk
I agree with a lot of this but I don't think people use social media that way. I occasionally post vids of climbing on Instagram, mostly cos I like the platform for seeing what my friends and such are up to. I also am quite proud of some of the things I've done so I whack em up. I wouldn't say I'm promoting myself
As far as bullying goes there has been bullying on this site while I've been here. I think it's an important thing to talk about.
I always struggle telling a dover sole from a bristol heel.
I always struggle telling a dover sole from a bristol heel.
You have no sole.
if only they were playing by the same rules as (nearly) everyone else.
if only they were playing by the same rules as (nearly) everyone else.
For those of us who don't follow this, can you explain this?
You have no sole.
Send them into Llanberis Resoles, he'll sort them out in no time. :whistle:
In a nutshell, climbing mixed routes when they are not sufficiently snowy/icy, and are more like dry-tooling.
In a nutshell, climbing mixed routes when they are not sufficiently snowy/icy, and are more like dry-tooling.
Hardly a new phenomenon, or one limited to ladies. For years my armchair view, kept to myself because obvs it's uninformed, has been that 90% of winter climbing that goes on is glorified dry tooling.
Oh dear. I'm fighting the urge.. but it's so difficult to read without correcting.
(https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)
Insufficiently snowy/icy, and are more like dry-tooling.
...mixed routes should be properly frozen and have a wintery appearance and 'feel',
I think what you're looking at Will is another in a long line of examples of why instagram + hubris = the death of the soul of *climbing.
* winter or summer
Why?
1/ Because it's orders of magnitude more difficult to climb mixed routes in this condition.
People's views will differ, but I would describe the soul of climbing as something along the lines of:
Climb for the sake of enjoying climbing, acknowledge that it's an arbitrary game with arbitrary rules designed to preserve the challenge of the game. Try to respect the arbitrary rules and accept the challenge. Question your motivations, if you find yourself avoiding the challenge. The rock, the climb, the history of the game and its characters, and the landscape in which the game is played are all important. You aren't.
Why?
1/ Because it's orders of magnitude more difficult to climb mixed routes in this condition.
So mixed climbing is big grades for bad connies...
I'm messing with you, Pete, but only half-messing. When I used to enjoy baiting winter climbers on here about 10+ years ago it was because I was young and dumb(er) but also because I didn't really respect a discipline that caused harm to classic summer routes by climbing them in grim conditions (albeit less midgy) with inappropriate tools. Point Five Gully looks absolutely mint and I'd love to be dragged up it; Centurion not so much.
Personally I think folk should post comments when they see vids titled as ascents of problems, but the climber has not followed a rule by which the prob is defined.Bumping this to remind me to reply to it later.
These days people massively rely on video beta, to the extent that they often don't read the description of the problem. So bad beta propagates and quickly becomes the default beta, especially if it also happens to be easier than doing the actual problem.
Personally I think folk should post comments when they see vids titled as ascents of problems, but the climber has not followed a rule by which the prob is defined.Bumping this to remind me to reply to it later.
These days people massively rely on video beta, to the extent that they often don't read the description of the problem. So bad beta propagates and quickly becomes the default beta, especially if it also happens to be easier than doing the actual problem.
Shame, I haven't read a surreal scragrock satirical rant in I dunno, weeks!Much Appleojies brother Moles, i have been recovering from injuries sustained in the initiation ceremony for the Higher House of the Dab.
It surprises me how many people think it's acceptable with a "non-crutial" dab.
When trying a bloc in Font I dabbed the stone next to the problem we were working on and I called out myself, but topped out nevertheless as it was my last attempt of the day. And everyone around kept on saying how that dab wasn't important. It didn't help in sending the boulder.
It makes me think less of bouldering that people think the one Finbarr posted matters. The sun shade hindered him if anything.
accidentally touching a leafOh yeah, I forgot to include that in my confessions... my soul is as dirty as my heels from all the leaves they've scuffed on crappy low problems.
accidentally touching a leafOh yeah, I forgot to include that in my confessions... my soul is as dirty as my heels from all the leaves they've scuffed on crappy low problems.
Unfortunately I don't think Scraggles is going to have much to argue against here. All I was going to say is that it's a fair point wanting to get video representation / video lines / video beta accurate. Having been in Font for a couple of weeks and discovering that as well as being The Spiritual Home Of Tickmarks and The Spiritual Home Of Honeypotting, it's also a Spiritual Home Of Eliminate Lines And Arbitrary Rules.... Well, at least, there are a few slightly harder problems that are adjacent enough to easier terrain to require some guidance. And thus I occasionally turned to bleau.info to try to gauge what exactly the line was and what exactly was "in". Generally this made sense but it did highlight the importance of people posting videos of the actual problems...Personally I think folk should post comments when they see vids titled as ascents of problems, but the climber has not followed a rule by which the prob is defined.Bumping this to remind me to reply to it later.
These days people massively rely on video beta, to the extent that they often don't read the description of the problem. So bad beta propagates and quickly becomes the default beta, especially if it also happens to be easier than doing the actual problem.
I wonder if there might be a market for clearly shot well angled footage of relatively off-piste problems :-\
Oh ye of little faithUnfortunately I don't think Scraggles is going to have much to argue against here. All I was going to say is that it's a fair point wanting to get video representation / video lines / video beta accurate. Having been in Font for a couple of weeks and discovering that as well as being The Spiritual Home Of Tickmarks and The Spiritual Home Of Honeypotting, it's also a Spiritual Home Of Eliminate Lines And Arbitrary Rules.... Well, at least, there are a few slightly harder problems that are adjacent enough to easier terrain to require some guidance. And thus I occasionally turned to bleau.info to try to gauge what exactly the line was and what exactly was "in". Generally this made sense but it did highlight the importance of people posting videos of the actual problems...Personally I think folk should post comments when they see vids titled as ascents of problems, but the climber has not followed a rule by which the prob is defined.Bumping this to remind me to reply to it later.
These days people massively rely on video beta, to the extent that they often don't read the description of the problem. So bad beta propagates and quickly becomes the default beta, especially if it also happens to be easier than doing the actual problem.
Incidentally I noticed an amusing general trend of many videos to be pretty dire apart from a reference for the lines - common trends being wasting time with channel logos and intros, rubbish shoecam angles or partly hidden behind trees, mostly filmed in the strongest possible sunlight and shade, and usually trying to avoid any perspective that shows the quality of the lines and aesthetics. I wonder if there might be a market for clearly shot well angled footage of relatively off-piste problems :-\
Unfortunately I don't think Scraggles is going to have much to argue against here. All I was going to say is that it's a fair point wanting to get video representation / video lines / video beta accurate. Having been in Font for a couple of weeks and discovering that as well as being The Spiritual Home Of Tickmarks and The Spiritual Home Of Honeypotting, it's also a Spiritual Home Of Eliminate Lines And Arbitrary Rules.... Well, at least, there are a few slightly harder problems that are adjacent enough to easier terrain to require some guidance. And thus I occasionally turned to bleau.info to try to gauge what exactly the line was and what exactly was "in". Generally this made sense but it did highlight the importance of people posting videos of the actual problems...Personally I think folk should post comments when they see vids titled as ascents of problems, but the climber has not followed a rule by which the prob is defined.Bumping this to remind me to reply to it later.
These days people massively rely on video beta, to the extent that they often don't read the description of the problem. So bad beta propagates and quickly becomes the default beta, especially if it also happens to be easier than doing the actual problem.
Incidentally I noticed an amusing general trend of many videos to be pretty dire apart from a reference for the lines - common trends being wasting time with channel logos and intros, rubbish shoecam angles or partly hidden behind trees, mostly filmed in the strongest possible sunlight and shade, and usually trying to avoid any perspective that shows the quality of the lines and aesthetics. I wonder if there might be a market for clearly shot well angled footage of relatively off-piste problems :-\
I wonder if there might be a market for clearly shot well angled footage of relatively off-piste problems :-\
I am doing some repeats of less known/been a while since the last repeat problems. That's why I try to document it, because there's a lot of mystery/confusion about what the line is. But I really hate graphics and don't have any equipment besides my phone. So I often put out the video anyways to show where the boulder goes, but if it would require me to put even more effort into it I'd drop it..
Also working through the snow every time to turn on the camera is a pain, so it's easier to keep the camera a little bit too close.. :sorry:
I know it's called Born Dabby and I'd easily forgive the more minor ones, but does he actually stand on the block down and right?Yes he does
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CrYhSacpdHE/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
What the whatting what?!!?
I'd like to see any of the anti-bullying brigade justify that one...
As for the accused- Who did the first ascent and what is their Beta?{thus setting the rules}.
is there a general consensus on how it is climbed.
With all the quality 7C's at Stanage, why on earth would anyone choose that as their first? Bewildering.Well, to be fair, he chose NOT to do it...
Just do Brass Monkeys like everyone else.
As far as I can tell, that's the actual method? So not a dab, just weird rules :shrug:
I know it's called Born Dabby and I'd easily forgive the more minor ones, but does he actually stand on the block down and right?
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CrYhSacpdHE/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=
Forgive me father, for I havesinnedwind
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CwK_jLqN8Rk/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
Where to start?
I don't think he actually touches the pads though, does he? Can't hear anything, no movement of the pad either.
Not worth giving an extra grade for sans knee though.
Is it meant to be a sit too?
Where to start?
Yesterday I was very close to send "Artaburu", today rest day and we will see tomorrow...
What does this have to do with dabbing?That's got to qualify, surely?
I suspect if there's nothing to nitpick then there won't be many nitpicky comments?? (Will's video aside)
I suspect if there's nothing to nitpick then there won't be many nitpicky comments?? (Will's video aside)
I suspect if there's nothing to nitpick then there won't be many nitpicky comments?? (Will's video aside)
Doesn't this sentence imply that there's nothing to nitpick in my video, when in fact it should be met with nothing but contempt and decision?
If people want to get a message of purity across, then why not restrict that to positive comments bigging up exemplary ascents? So show a video and say "note my backside was planted so deeply in the wet peat, it made a sucking sound as I pulled out to start" or whatever.
And as before this thread is called "Bring Out Your Dabs". It's not called "Bring out your shoddy footwork" nor "Bring out your dubious fashion sense" nor "Bring out your shit tasted in lowball eliminates (okay there might be natural crossover there) nor "Bring out your embarassing power squeaks" nor "Bring out your lanking past the hard moves" nor anything else. It's not a matter of taste nor preference, it's a simple matter of people publicly showing off and claiming they've done a problem when they've not done it and cheated by dabbing (and 99% of the time show no awareness / remorse). If Stone's 5'1" friend has dabbed in the video of her problem, then yes she's dabbed. If she hasn't dabbed and has simply done the problem, then what on earth is she going to get called out for??
If they aren't, then being a merciless online vigilante seems to me like trawling through social media looking for pictures of dogs and babies that you consider to be of merely average appearance and addressing the balance of the comments to that effect.Firstly I don't think anyone is being a merciless online vigilante. It's just general climbing enthusiasts stumbling across dabs in videos and sharing the event. I also doubt if anyone is going to take issue with someone posting a video AS "them not really doing a 7B", if they're clear they're not really doing it...
But by publicly posting online are they really just 'celebrating their enjoyment of the outside"? I would posit that most people are (maybe subconsciously) looking for people to applaud their efforts. And if that's the case and they didn't actually do what they're asking us to applaud them for, it seems fair to point that out.
100% this. People posting bouldering videos online want validation to some extent. Which is cool, but it cuts both ways, people aren't obliged to only offer gushing praise!
The result of all of this sword of truth attitude though is that problems typically just have half a dozen videos of lanky blokes online.
To me that outcome sucks. I'd imagine that to a 5'1" woman it really sucks.
The videos of people doing the problem wrong are I agree no help but the point is they need to be let pass or otherwise a whole cohort of good videos get scared off. If, as people claim, it is so easy to tell a video is of a non-ascent, then it is easy to just ignore such videos.
But by publicly posting online are they really just 'celebrating their enjoyment of the outside"? I would posit that most people are (maybe subconsciously) looking for people to applaud their efforts. And if that's the case and they didn't actually do what they're asking us to applaud them for, it seems fair to point that out.
100% this. People posting bouldering videos online want validation to some extent. Which is cool, but it cuts both ways, people aren't obliged to only offer gushing praise!
But even if it ran rife I still don't think it would matter much.
Yeah yeah I'm sure a tight rope helping curtail a cut-loose would get on here too :PFair point!
I'm also unconvinced that we even need 30 videos detailing every single variation of beta on every problem. Once a problem has a few videos out there, unless new ones are offering something new (a unique sequence or whatever) they are essentially just detritus in the cybersphere, just like this post :) How many videos of Gorilla Warfare do we need out there!?
I think the quality of a scene as absolutely nothing to do with posting videos online!
happy, welcoming, punter scenes too.
90% of comments on something like instagram are sycophantic and/or moronic, I dont think that's the makings of a good scene of any kind...
SM I have spoken to quite a few women at the crag who do feel put off sharing videos because of how men behave. Be that criticism of new sequences/pad stacking to reach holds/men just being trash/something I'm not aware of or may not understand from a female perspective.
I don't know if I would agree that a massive cohort of women have been put off filming their ascents are putting them online because of comments about dabbing. What are we basing that conclusion off; one anecdote? There are lots of female climbing Youtubers showing footage of problems and thats ace.
I think there is sadly a trade off that has to be made. Seems to me the options are:
1) continue with the scrutiny culture and accept that puts off many women from posting videos, and perhaps off climbing too.
2) ignore goofy dab videos for the greater good of wider inclusion etc.
Personally I think folk should post comments when they see vids titled as ascents of problems, but the climber has not followed a rule by which the prob is defined.
These days people massively rely on video beta, to the extent that they often don't read the description of the problem. So bad beta propagates and quickly becomes the default beta, especially if it also happens to be easier than doing the actual problem.
Oh I actually took it down cause it got bin voted to death so assumed no one thought it was any good so wasn’t worthwhile having a video, wasn’t too bothered about the dab as I did it without dabbing :lol:
.
Not so much now but in the past I have really struggled to post on the internet because of fear of being critisized. Especially on here. I would have done something, that I was genuinely excited about, thought it was cool and wanted to share with the community. Only for it to be diminished in some way (usually Adam Long retro-claiming what I thought was a first ascent (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,31655.msg650806.html#msg650806) coupled with some.kind of put down).
The counter to that is: If you didn't think it was worth claiming at the time, why was it worth claiming when HighRepute crops up with it?
.
Not so much now but in the past I have really struggled to post on the internet because of fear of being critisized. Especially on here. I would have done something, that I was genuinely excited about, thought it was cool and wanted to share with the community. Only for it to be diminished in some way (usually Adam Long retro-claiming what I thought was a first ascent (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,31655.msg650806.html#msg650806) coupled with some.kind of put down).
Sorry about that, wasn’t intended to put down, just a statement of what happened. Not sure we’ll ever arrive at the correct etiquette for retro-claiming stuff, as it does tend to cause disappointment. On the other hand how would you feel if you discovered you hadn’t done an FA but no one had told you so as to boost your ego. Better, or patronised? If it’s any consolation it has happened to me many times too, and for anyone claiming non-cutting edge problems in the Peak it’s highly likely to happen. You say ‘usually’ suggesting there were other times?
I wouldn’t regard myself as a habitual retro claimer but Bonjoy has suggested to me I should claim more stuff so a) it gets written up, and b) I don’t have to be a subsequent buzz kill retroclaimer. The problem is (apologies for being patronising but I genuinely can’t see a way around it) it wouldn’t occur to me to claim this as it was, to me, just something I did on a crap day in a desperate search for dry rock, and my assumption is anything at this grade has probably been done and it was a bit eliminate, and it really would not occur to me to start trawling about looking for prior claims. Would you, honestly, have thought it as cool and as worth sharing if you didn’t think it was new? Say some guys you didn’t know just pointed it out as they were leaving?
A big part of climbing for me is messing about around the lines as well as on the lines and that has always been the case for a lot of people. We tidy them up for the guidebook, but that doesn’t make it a complete record of everything that has been done, particularly for bouldering. Even now we have the web there is a strong argument for not writing up everything as otherwise you end up with too much noise and not enough signal. But we all go through that phase of being excited when we think we’re about to get in the history books. Sorry, it’s patronising again I’m sure.
Since you asked, the other retroes I can remember were the direct start to profit of doom, that you retroed on behalf of BB, and an alt finish to kidneystone. That might be it, I'm not keeping track, although I recently joked that Ive had more things retroed by you than I've had first ascents.
Without delving too deeply into the nuances of the discussion I would make one observation. This is more based on climbing around another cohort of short people, that is children.
Well meaning more experienced climbers/adults, don't bother to explain problem rules to the climber in question, or even suggest they don't really matter or aren't applicable to the less experienced climber. The climber takes this on board and only finds out they've had smoke blown up their arse when they post a video online, which is naturally quite a jarring way to find out that boulderers care about rules. Much better not to be patronised in the first place really. And expecting the wider climbing community to uphold the original deception just seems like two wrongs not making a right to me. Obvious caveats apply etc.
A plethora of beta videos (especially if they are invalid ascents) does not enrich the climbing scene. You may like not having to work out the moves for yourself, but that doesn't make it an overall "good".No one has to look at bouldering videos (or watch other people climbing IRL as that would equally apply to your points).
Working out moves is part of the fun for lots of us, and is seriously undervalued as a skill, mainly due to said beta videos being everywhere.
Are you saying that because you don't like watching videos and don't want others to, mocking is good because that frightens people off posting and you want that aim?
03675085]
Questions for you stone:
Do you think its ok for people to post videos claiming to have climbed things they haven't? Do you think there might be some knock on effects if it was considered unacceptable to point out when people have made a mistake/aren't aware of the rules/are obviously cheating? (and take the piss out of them in the last example, but not the first two)
Seriously, I think it is always much better to convey potentially awkward stuff face to face rather than online. I think japey comments online are an especially grim approach. To be honest, to me, that comes across as being at least as motivated by the esprit-de-corps derived amongst the mockers than for public clarification of bouldering rules (obviously I can only guess as to other peoples' motivations but that is how you are perceived by me at least).
It's a wider point, but reading between the lines of Stones posts I think he's arguing that piss taking shouldn't exist in the online arena, only face to face and even then should have no edge at all to it and should only be taking place between people who know each other well. Meanwhile, all that should exist in the online arena is relentless positivity. I think that is both unrealistic and very undesirable.
Edit; as I posted stone has confirmed this. I think that's hopelessly idealistic. It's taking #bekind to a place where the concept completely ceases to be useful. It also ignores that many people find it much easier to order their thoughts into a cogent response in text rather than verbally.
Fiend, many people express much the same view point as that regarding online mocking of eg people expressing mental health experiences. I find that view mystifying in that context and in this context too.
Fiend, many people express much the same view point as that regarding online mocking of eg people expressing mental health experiences. I find that view mystifying in that context and in this context too.
Stone do you really not get that there is a massive difference between someone choosing to share themselves deliberately minorly cheating at a leisure activity which is entirely within their control, and someone choosing to share traumatic struggles with health issues they are unavoidably suffering from, and how those two things should be treated?? Or is this another post in the "World's Worst Analogies" Top Trumps game??
Okay time for some #realtalk as some of you are missing the point. Sure curbing false claims / dubious practises / invalid ascents, and educating people on that is a worthy aim for the benefit of the community. But it's not the point.
The point is having a good laugh and a little light bantz taking the piss out of people who have been daft enough to deliberately publicly post a video of them dabbing, and even dafter showing no shame and claiming they've done the problem.
Polite education shouldn't get in the way of a bit of good old "Great beta for walking along the pads'" and "Should have just climbed the tree and ignored the rock" and "Great to see that 1940s combined tactics live on with that spotter assistance".
Sure the dabbers might not find it as rib-tickling as they really should, but there's an easy solution to that - cure the problem not the symptons - by not posting dabbing videos. No dabbing, no mockery, nothing to fear.
Dingdong I strongly resent being parked with the boomers, I'm only 30! :lol:
Also you should ask your partner how she’d feel if she posted a video of her dabbing and then found out some guys were laughing about it on UKB
I cannot see how that it could be construed as bullying .
No one’s saying you can’t politely point out dabs to peopleUnless I've misunderstood, this is exactly what Stone is suggesting - that people shouldn't be pointing out dabs or any other scrutiny, whether on this thread or in comments on the video, or in messages. Only face-to-face. I think it should be fine to point it out, but best to do it nicely.
Stone, what do you think about calling out people climbing on wet rock?
During the Christmas period when I was bored my feed pushed a reel of a climber (apparently sponsored?) climbing on a Font classic that's clearly absolutely gopping but all the comments (and I've checked again just now) are "sick dude", "such a good problem" etc. and there are likes by members of this forum. I don't know the guy but my feeling is that a) his sponsors should be calling this out and b) that in general the behaviour needs calling out.
He's got a video where he does T-crack at Cratcliffe. I've always been too crap/feeble to manage that whenever I've tried. Hat's off to him from me.
If anyone here knows him or his contact details or whatever, by all means message him to spread the word about wet rock. Perhaps when you next post a video (if you're someone who does) include a spiel about avoiding wet grit.He's got a video where he does T-crack at Cratcliffe. I've always been too crap/feeble to manage that whenever I've tried. Hat's off to him from me.
hats off to climbing on soaking wet rock
Faisal is a trip. If you ever wondered what steroid use in climbing looks like this is it.
Also always made me laugh how his insta has over 100k followers but his posts get like 5 likes :lol:
Does he say in the video that climbing wet grit damages the rock?
Sorry if I missed that.
Faisal is a trip. If you ever wondered what steroid use in climbing looks like this is it.
Also always made me laugh how his insta has over 100k followers but his posts get like 5 likes :lol:
Now this is the kind of baseless accusation the forum has been missing lately!
No beef with the manifestation chat, that's basically just visualisation isn't it?
Does he say in the video that climbing wet grit damages the rock?
Sorry if I missed that.
I just watched the video again. My hearing is crap (despite hearing aids) but I assiduously read every word of subtitles. Where does he say climbing on wet grit damages the rock?
I re-watched the video again, fully with the intention of putting a comment about climbing wet rock if he had said that it damages the rock and yet did so.
I'll do that if someone tells me what time point to read/listen him saying that.
I agree that he clearly says he climbs on wet rock, but that is totally different from doing so after saying that doing so damages the rock.
Yes he says he's climbing on wet rock.I just watched the video again. My hearing is crap (despite hearing aids) but I assiduously read every word of subtitles. Where does he say climbing on wet grit damages the rock?
I re-watched the video again, fully with the intention of putting a comment about climbing wet rock if he had said that it damages the rock and yet did so.
I'll do that if someone tells me what time point to read/listen him saying that.
I agree that he clearly says he climbs on wet rock, but that is totally different from doing so after saying that doing so damages the rock.
7:33 to 7:41
For me, watching it, I find myself wondering if he's neurodivergent. So do what you will with that.
For me, watching it, I find myself wondering if he's neurodivergent. So do what you will with that.
Agree..
On the contrary, I think the implication is that some slack should be cut for the obvious poor behaviour on show in the video.
Being neurodivergent is not a catch all phrase through
On the contrary, I think the implication is that some slack should be cut for the obvious poor behaviour on show in the video.
100% this.
Being neurodivergent is not a catch all phrase through
Isn’t it literally a catch all phrase?
Being neurodivergent is not a catch all phrase through
Isn’t it literally a catch all phrase?
Neuro what now?
Dress it up all you like but isn't he just a fucking bellend?
Like I said, many people are simply unaware that climbing on wet grit damages the rock.
Spread the word about that.
For me, watching it, I find myself wondering if he's neurodivergent. So do what you will with that.
Agree..
I read you comments with similar distaste to how I would if you had said something like, "I find myself wondering if he's homosexual".
It seems to imply that if he were neurodivergent, he should be less proud to express his style, and should cower away and leave youtube to those with taste that conforms to yours.
Can neurodivergent people also be complete bell ends... :shrug:Hell yeah :2thumbsup:
Maybe, if you care about other humans at all, don't be mean to them (or about them) unless you're really, really sure they're a genuine bell-end
Well said stone and Pete. Obviously the behaviour needs calling out but i'm a little surprised our bullying expert thinks the insults and mocking are fine. Perhaps I'm being over sensitive as the parent of a neurodivergent child who is worried he will be bullied for being different.
I personally first found out by watching BBC TV "Countryfile" when Shauna Coxsey was featured on it. They were planning on showing bouldering at Stanage Plantation I think but it was damp and she said grit is fragile when damp and so she wasn't going to climb.Like I said, many people are simply unaware that climbing on wet grit damages the rock.
Spread the word about that.
When you said this in response to my post a few weeks ago I was pretty stunned. I'm not really sure how you'd have missed this.
Has he not been called a bell end by quite a few people and cowboyhat seems to be saying thats fine even if he is neurodivergent. Fiend our bullying expert seems to have wadded cowboyhat for this view. Unless he has wadded him for another comment in which case apologies to fiend. You had some good comments ding dong.Your "our bullying expert" comment isn't helpful is it. If you want to refute the thread I posted about banter vs bully then you know exactly where to do it, and you can leave your assessment of me out of it.
Direct, private, courteous, communication is the way to let him know about wet grit preservation.
Don't climb on wet rock is what needs to be said.
Like I said, many people are simply unaware that climbing on wet grit damages the rock.
Spread the word about that.
When you said this in response to my post a few weeks ago I was pretty stunned. I'm not really sure how you'd have missed this.
I'm never going to get my head around some of the (imo, insane) responses on this thread so no point arguing about that. I'm intrigued by the notion that there are experienced climbers on here who didn't know about climbing on wet grit until recently though. It does rather beg the question of how!
Stone, you say you didn't know you shouldn't climb on wet grit until Shauna was on Countryfile, which from a bit of googling I think aired around 2017 when she was in her Olympics cycle? Given you've been climbing so long I find that astonishing. I believe you but I would suggest you are the outlier of outliers.
topic split? (and deletion of Israel/Palestine posts??)
I wonder what catalysed the beginning of concern.
wet granite on a sea cliff is fine to climb on
I think the huge problem is the conflation between objecting to something that needs to stop so as to preserve the rock (ie climbing on wet grit) and people simply not finding the guy's style to their taste.
Direct, private, courteous, communication is the way to let him know about wet grit preservation.
Putting your own info out there is the way to educate wider about wet grit preservation (eg end your own videos with a word saying how you waited until all was dry to preserve the rock or whatever).
If you don't like his style, then there are zillions of quiet, understated, bouldering youtubers to watch. Just move on to one of them.
Regarding the whole neurodivergence discussion, my impression is that if someone has a clear medicalised condition (eg Down's syndrome) then almost everyone will be kind and accommodating towards them. If someone is judged as having "no excuse" then supposedly it is OK to be utterly vile towards them just for harmlessly being themselves. So this whole thing of endevouring to discern whether someone eg has some very slight manic grandiosity (so should be given slack) or "no excuse" and so should be subject to a "flogging" -that's what sickens me.
Regarding the whole neurodivergence discussion, my impression is that if someone has a clear medicalised condition (eg Down's syndrome) then almost everyone will be kind and accommodating towards them.
Can neurodivergent people also be complete bell ends... :shrug:
wet granite on a sea cliff is fine to climb on
until you pull on a flake that has its join to the rock saturated and it snaps off
Whether or not one human has climbed on a certain rock type in a certain location doesn't change the fact that water in any type of pore space, in this case secondary porosity induced by erosion, reduces the effective stress and therefore strength of the rock
Wet grit is impossible to climb and so unpleasant I’m not sure why anyone would do it to themselves. I was a Londoner during and post lockdown and even I knew not to climb on wet grit or sandstone so not exactly true blanket statement.
Being a Northumberland regular, my feeling at the time was that I couldn't really understand how wet grit would fare any better than wet sandstone so I wouldn't bumble around in the damp. Certainly there were plenty of trad parties carrying on after the rain had started (ie not just finishing the route they were on).
I mean there’s still the massive problem that trad instruction companies/guides still take people out regularly on the grit when it’s wet, ya always see them climbing 20foot crack at burbage north when it’s soaked. So bad.
It's not that I don't believe you Stone, just as someone who I've known as a climber for years I'm surprised Countryfile was where you first heard of this. Did you not see the 3rd Rock saga where they had an advertising campaign featuring people climbing on wet rock? It didn't go down too well.I missed all of that.
Whether or not one human has climbed on a certain rock type in a certain location doesn't change the fact that water in any type of pore space, in this case secondary porosity induced by erosion, reduces the effective stress and therefore strength of the rock
I’m interested in the mechanics of this.
The best way to dry a hold is to let the breeze do its job. Any heat applied (rapidly and/or above ambient temperature) to pore fluids will cause expansion, increasing pore pressure and reducing effective stress between rock grains and therefore forcing grains apart where there is no confining pressure. This leads to grain loss and erosion. If you could apply a cool air to the rock like a localised strong breeze, it would dry the holds efficiently and safely.
I’m interested in the mechanics of this.
Since you asked... (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,21341.msg388544.html#msg388544)
Interestingly, I appear to have foreseen portable leaf blowers by about ten years in the above post...
Is the TLDR drying boulders with a blowtorch bad, drying them with a fan or portable leaf blower good? :worms:
I’m interested in the mechanics of this.
Since you asked... (https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,21341.msg388544.html#msg388544)The best way to dry a hold is to let the breeze do its job. Any heat applied (rapidly and/or above ambient temperature) to pore fluids will cause expansion, increasing pore pressure and reducing effective stress between rock grains and therefore forcing grains apart where there is no confining pressure. This leads to grain loss and erosion. If you could apply a cool air to the rock like a localised strong breeze, it would dry the holds efficiently and safely.
Except in this instance we're talking about the difference between wet and dry rock. Dry rock has effectively no pore fluid pressure, whereas when the rock gets wet and water soaks into the pore space, the pore fluid pressure increases. Rock strength is a sum of pore fluid pressure and effective stress, and if the effective stress is reduced by increasing pore fluid pressure, it takes less external force applied on the rock to damage it.
There are two types of porosity - primary and secondary. Primary porosity is a result of the formation of the rock, such as deposition of sand grains naturally having space between them. This is why siliclastic rocks - sedimentary rocks made of silicate minerals, such as sandstone, shale, siltstone, conglomerate, are weaker when wet. But fractures that form within the rock after its formation, from whatever source (loading/unloading, tectonic stress), and things like dissolution within limestones, are secondary porosity. Flakes on rocks often form through preferential erosion of certain minerals (for example feldspars and mica in our climate weather down to clays, whereas quartz doesn't weather so readily), which can allow water in behind flakes and often into secondary porosity formed from minerals themselves eroding out, weakening the rock.
Interestingly, I appear to have foreseen portable leaf blowers by about ten years in the above post...
Apologies for mentioning you fiend. I did so because I pretty much agree with your previous comments regarding bullying v banter. I think that some of the comments on this fella go beyond banter and I don't think live up to the standards you suggest. I don't like online assessments either which is why I wouldn't be calling him a bell end. Don't climb on wet rock is what needs to be said.Thanks for a calm reply kac. I guess if it came out that the guy had proper mental health issues (it's all speculation so far) and these videos were the way they had to be expressed then accusations of bellendery would be reconsidered. I might be slightly biased until then as I have quite a lot of distaste for hysterical clickbait social media.
That’s kind of what I was suggesting earlier that black and white directives don’t fit all situations. If wet rock wasn’t climbed on at coastal venues many routes would never get climbed, think of dank greasy wet Cornish zawns. Coastal boulders are more likely to get destroyed by storms than damaged by bouldering. Quite a few SW venues have been developed using practices that would be unacceptable if we used the ‘never climb on wet rock’ rule. However I completely get the gist of the argument.
Only skim read it, but this paper explains the mechanisms at work - also includes testing of Fontainebleau sandstone.Interesting.
https://academic.oup.com/gji/article/192/3/1091/822850
Fontainebleau sst failed to serve as an unambiguous reference rock with respect to the two clay-bearing sandstones. A behaviour apparently similar to dilatancy hardening could be observed at low moisture contents, which at the same time appears incompatible with the concept of a pore pressure. These observations may also be related to an unknown physico-chemical effect, but a conclusive microstructural scenario is missing.
On the other hand, there's a difference between people being slated for behaviour that's actually harmful (e.g climbing on wet grit, assuming they know why that's a bad idea) and people being singled out because they're presenting themselves in a way which other people find embarrassing/uncool/"off"/cringy.I've struggled to get my head around this thread. It really hit a nerve with me. I guess I saw someone doing a video enthusing about doing something that I also love doing (climbing outdoors). The conditions were totally awful, he included his warm up climbing that looked as ungainly as I would look first pull on the rock after a drive up from London. He seemed undimmed and radiant through it all. Perhaps the video was brash but tastes differ.
On the third hand: sometimes you just gotta go "... okay, what does this person even think 'satirical' means?" and boggle for a moment.
And in some ways -- and this is me having a visceral emotional reaction here, not necessarily thought through or at all rational -- it makes me feel uncomfortable when people decide behind someone's back that they're obviously Not Normal and should be tiptoed around, in a way which cuts them off from ordinary or authentic human responses.
It can feel a lot like "Yeah, obviously we all still KNOW this person is embarrassing/uncool/'off'/cringy, but they're defective so they can't help it, so the important thing is that we don't SAY it out loud where they can hear."
I've struggled to get my head around this thread. It really hit a nerve with me. I guess I saw someone doing a video enthusing about doing something that I also love doing (climbing outdoors). The conditions were totally awful, he included his warm up climbing that looked as ungainly as I would look first pull on the rock after a drive up from London. He seemed undimmed and radiant through it all. Perhaps the video was brash but tastes differ.
Then I saw, what came across to me as, the conformity police getting their clip books out to try and snuff it out. As I see it, people conferring to come to a consensus as to whether someone is "embarrassing/uncool/'off'/cringy" is nothing more than them appointing themselves as conformity police. I agree being self appointed conformity police is an "ordinary or authentic human response". Loads of utterly toxic behaviours are "ordinary or authentic human responses". Obviously being snide is hardly raping and pilaging (also totally standard "ordinary or authentic human responses"). It riles me though.
Unapologetically bouldering on soaking wet grit (Almscliffian grit too which is quite soft in places and battered enough already), when he almost certainly knows that he shouldn't. Filming it and pushing it out to his impressionable YouTube followers who will likely think nothing of following his example on their next trip to Burbage South. Claiming to have done stuff he hasn't (cheating) to make himself look better at climbing so that credulous punters might sign up to his personal training programme.
That's the behaviour of an arsehole in my book. If that opinion makes me mean-spirited then I guess I'm just a big ol' meanie.
My impression is that his videos are sincere and he simply was out of the loop regarding wet grit being fragile.
i'm gonna avoid any hold that is wet, to protect the rock
Has anyone contacted Apefoo (privately and courteously) to suggest, I don't know, wider camera angles, footage that doesn't blatantly zoom in to obscure obvious use of the floor and / or some up front honesty about problems climbed or not? I mean that Churnet video beggars belief!!!
Man! Apefoo's vids manage to be inspiring, funny and absolutely outrageously full of cheating all at the same time! Incredible!!!
Unapologetically bouldering on soaking wet grit (Almscliffian grit too which is quite soft in places and battered enough already), when he almost certainly knows that he shouldn't. Filming it and pushing it out to his impressionable YouTube followers who will likely think nothing of following his example on their next trip to Burbage South. Claiming to have done stuff he hasn't (cheating) to make himself look better at climbing so that credulous punters might sign up to his personal training programme.
That's the behaviour of an arsehole in my book. If that opinion makes me mean-spirited then I guess I'm just a big ol' meanie.