UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => bouldering => Topic started by: Carliios on August 18, 2022, 12:01:35 pm
-
Someone mentioned this could be an interesting thread on the “should we document everything?” Thread so here we go. What are some “classic” boulders with arbitrary rules that would mean they’re not classics by todays standards
My two are:
Green Traverse - certain holds in and others not
The Rib - no foot ledge allowed
-
Can't you just do the Green Traverse with everything in? It's been a while...
-
There's probably a distinction to be made between problems that arguably shouldn't be classics due to rules, and problems that are classics in spite of these rules (but would perhaps be questioned were they put up today).
The strict version of Green Traverse likely falls into the first category as it's not really very good and I reckon anything that eliminates a specific technique is shit, although I was surprised by how satisfying the pop up from the rail was when I finally got around to doing it. I reckon worth a star for that plus historical interest. The Green Traverse as it's climbed 99% of the time is really a different entity I think, and I think is one of those solidly two-star mid-grade grit traverses that are popular because of social media, their grade, the ease of working the moves, and their location at popular crags, rather than having quality relating to movement, line, or rock quality - Steep Traverse, Mark's Roof, Zippy's, Beretta (lime but I still think it's inexplicably popular).
T-Crack seems like a good example of the latter category, in that it eliminates both a hold (the chip) and part of a separate block and is still pretty indisputably a classic. Is Sheep Shifter at Cave Dale considered a classic (most people seem to rate it highly in the context of Peak Lime, but maybe that's still somewhat myopic)? If so I would wager that eyebrows would be raised if it were written up today as 'three-star board-style climbing on lovely, ergonomic holds but eliminating the massive plinth', at least if it were claimed by someone not possessing a solid CV of FAs.
-
Can't you just do the Green Traverse with everything in? It's been a while...
The ear hold near the top is eliminated and you also can’t use heels for the proper strict tick!
-
What are some “classic” boulders with arbitrary rules...
You HAVE been to Almscliff haven't you?!
-
Sounds like, given its location, the Green Traverse has a lot to answer for in establishing a precedent for problems with illogical rules being assigned classic status.
Seems particularly bizarre when, if I remember correctly (and I may not), doing it in a non-eliminate way is a pretty decent problem and not even that much easier.
-
The Rib - no foot ledge allowed
I've never seen this rule before. Seems odd to turn it into an eliminate. You can do it with or without the ledge, without is only a little harder. The crux is the top move.
-
What are some “classic” boulders with arbitrary rules that would mean they’re not classics by todays standards
Applied Stress, Burbage South :lol: :2thumbsup:
Also I did the Green Traverse 15 years ago and just followed the easiest line I could manage. That might have been dropping down to a crimp rail because the top was too slopey or maybe not. It was quite good but hardly a grit classic, just kinda thuggy. Honourary Caley up the slope also has a rule to stay off the sidepulls next to the crack, but that was ace. I did it in conditions so cold and crisp my mouth was drying out on the walk-up and at one point i cut loose on it (on a slab?!).
-
What are some “classic” boulders with arbitrary rules that would mean they’re not classics by todays standards
Applied Stress, Burbage South :lol: :2thumbsup:
Im honoured you consider it a classic already fiend :beer2:
-
Only by yesterday's standards, whatever they were :blink:
-
Blockbuster, as mentioned earlier.
Maybe Ben's Wall at Robin Hoods Stride? Haven't done it so no idea if avoiding the arete feels stupid.
-
Can't you just do the Green Traverse with everything in? It's been a while...
The ear hold near the top is eliminated and you also can’t use heels for the proper strict tick!
Be interesting to know the provenance of these rules, because that's what I was told when I was trying it, but I was told that was bollocks and to use what I wanted by an onlooker, who turned out to be Martin Veale. So go figure!
-
Can't you just do the Green Traverse with everything in? It's been a while...
The ear hold near the top is eliminated and you also can’t use heels for the proper strict tick!
Be interesting to know the provenance of these rules, because that's what I was told when I was trying it, but I was told that was bollocks and to use what I wanted by an onlooker, who turned out to be Martin Veale. So go figure!
Shark is the resident expert on the matter, hopefully he'll be along shortly to explain all in intimate detail.
-
The words "classic" and "testpiece" are often used interchangeably but they shouldn't be. It should be obvious which are which.
What's the arbitrary rule on Blockbuster? It's a jump start, so is the issue with how many pads people jump off? I don't think it makes a huge difference does it?
-
It's in the name of Blockbuster; originally climbed by people stepping off a block, this was then removed by Ron who did it via the jump start, obviously sans pads. So yeah it's pretty important how many pads you start off considering it was originally done from the floor.
Not to mention that I've witnessed people stacking sufficient pads to just pull on without the jump.
And obviously all of these approaches are inferior to the non-jump version, which involves an amazing dyno (I've done the move once, but then fell off! :slap:).
So it's a good example of a rules based classic problem that's inferior to the natural method.
-
Green Traverse I can't get too excited by, it just seems like 'go from there to there' to me. Can't remember using heels, but only because I don't think they'd been invented. Next the thorny problem of sit starts, don't tell anyone but a lot of problems make more sense with very low starts rather than cheek meets terra firma.
-
Blockbuster might not even sneak into the top 5 problems within a 10 metre radius of Zoo York. Not that ive managed to do many of those problems...
-
T-crack at cratcliffe always feels like a weird one to me. Probably just bitter because no one told me the chip was out when I first did it.
-
T-crack at cratcliffe always feels like a weird one to me. Probably just bitter because no one told me the chip was out when I first did it.
Was it chipped in before or after the problem was established?
-
One problem that come to mind is Tsunami at Rubicon, which forces you to match a pinch before moving out right to a crimp... a small slot hold is also eliminated.
Some people say that on Full Power at Gardoms you arnet allowed to put your heel on while sitting beneath the problem, and that you need to pull on and then place it.
Bullshit pedantry like this is best left for the schoolroom.
-
I don't think I've ever thought of green trav, the rib or tsunami as eliminates. Tsunami I would consider as a non eliminate problem where there's the option of a "historical sequence" if you want it. I certainly used all holds for that, dancing fish, and press low left. To me eliminates make sense when they create an entirely new/different problem that wouldn't exist otherwise, rather than just a slightly worse sequence on an obvious problem. Having said that, I've always followed the rules at crag x despite their stupidity so I'm clearly inconsistent...
-
I don't think I've ever thought of green trav, the rib or tsunami as eliminates. Tsunami I would consider as a non eliminate problem where there's the option of a "historical sequence" if you want it. I certainly used all holds for that, dancing fish, and press low left. To me eliminates make sense when they create an entirely new/different problem that wouldn't exist otherwise, rather than just a slightly worse sequence on an obvious problem. Having said that, I've always followed the rules at crag x despite their stupidity so I'm clearly inconsistent...
Green Trav in rockfax literally has each hold labelled and you’re told which holds you can use? You’re not “allowed” to use heels and in the rockfax guide the ear hold near the top that lots of people use isn’t labelled which assumes it’s eliminated. Maybe I just read that wrong but I’ve also been told that in person by locals before I moved up.
-
My old Vertebrate Peak District Bouldering guidebook makes no mention of any such fuckery, it just says
From the rounded blob on the arete traverse left displaying as little technique as possible.
-
My old Vertebrate Peak District Bouldering guidebook makes no mention of any such fuckery, it just says
From the rounded blob on the arete traverse left displaying as little technique as possible.
Someone must know where and when all these rules came about? :lol:
-
Green Trav in rockfax literally has each hold labelled and you’re told which holds you can use? You’re not “allowed” to use heels and in the rockfax guide the ear hold near the top that lots of people use isn’t labelled which assumes it’s eliminated. Maybe I just read that wrong but I’ve also been told that in person by locals before I moved up.
You've read it wrong. Look again. It doesn't prescribe any rules for Green Trav other than the starting hold. All the labelled holds are for the other eliminates around it. It also doesn't mention heels.
-
I don't know who wrote the Rockfax for bouldering in the peak, or even what guide it is, but if it's anything like their guides to Europe the author won't have climbed 99% of the stuff so I would take it with an enormous pinch of salt [edit - and it sounds like it might not even have rules in that from Jim's post]. I don't see any good reason for it to have rules, though there may be a "classic sequence" that people might want to do for historical completeness (same as the powerband dropdown). I don't remember the problem well enough to know which holds anyone might consider "out"
-
Green Trav in rockfax literally has each hold labelled and you’re told which holds you can use? You’re not “allowed” to use heels and in the rockfax guide the ear hold near the top that lots of people use isn’t labelled which assumes it’s eliminated. Maybe I just read that wrong but I’ve also been told that in person by locals before I moved up.
You've read it wrong. Look again. It doesn't prescribe any rules for Green Trav other than the starting hold. All the labelled holds are for the other eliminates around it. It also doesn't mention heels.
You can hopefully see where the confusion comes from? It has a line following all the marked holds so you would assume that those are the holds you have to use? And the heel thing is pretty well established let’s not pretend it’s not, even Shark has a beta comment on UKC saying heels aren’t allowed and there’s a strict log in UKC with the description “ As for the The Green Traverse but no heel hook allowed and both hands need to drop down.”
I wish you wouldn’t try and gaslight me, I’m a punter but not that much of a punter lol.
-
Jesus wept, no one is gaslighting anyone; people seem to be trying to work out where the rules have come from and I'm pointing out that contrary to what you wrote, the Rockfax doesn't tell you what holds you have to use, so the origin of it is not there. I'm always up for some Rockfax slagging where deserved but this isn't one of those occasions.
I'm also aware of the heels 'rule' but think I probably ignored it when I did the problem or didn't know as it obviously doesn't make sense.
Interesting that others don't consider the Rib an eliminate either, tbf I don't think the footledge is specified as out in the guide so perhaps this is another example of locals eliminating stuff to make ther after work session more interesting and them somehow becoming gospel over the years, albeit in a solely oral tradition rather than being written down anywhere.
-
I wish you wouldn’t try and gaslight me
Get a grip, he was only pointing out you'd read it wrong. You even said yourself you might have done ("Maybe I just read that wrong")
-
I wish you wouldn’t try and gaslight me
Get a grip, he was only pointing out you'd read it wrong. You even said yourself you might have done ("Maybe I just read that wrong")
Yes but not about the heel hooks which is literally the most widely well known rule about that climb. I don’t need to get a grip when I know for sure, 100% certainty that it’s a real rule that everyone knows and he tries to tell me It’s not. That’s exactly what gaslighting is, trying to make someone think that what they know isn’t true.
-
I've just checked in Rockfax Peak Bouldering and it says "Start on the rounded hold A and follow the holds leftwards, dropping down, then back up towards the left end of the block." The line dips down to the crimp rail then back up to the jugs. However the text doesn't say that you must drop down and match, and it doesn't say anything about heels. I'd guess that this is a classic example of sloppy Rockfax writing up. It also doesn't mention the chip on Cave Problem at Robin Hood's Stride, where to start for the Hippo at Plantation for it to be worth 7A+, that Thing on a Spring at Birchen is 7A only from a sit...
Edit to add: Here's the text from the 2004 Vertebrate Peak Bouldering guide: "From the rounded blob on the arête traverse leftwards displaying as little technique as possible. Once you've done this, do it again missing out the holds of your choice. Endless fun. Reversing it is slightly harder."
However I also once bumped into Martin Veale, shortly after I'd noticed all of Shark's comments on people's UKC photos telling them that they hadn't done it because they were shown using a heel. So I figured I'd take the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to ask the FA. He said that he couldn't remember using any heels and that the idea that the problem was an eliminate or had a defined sequence was nonsense as far as he was concerned. Based on that I'd guess that maybe the 'strict' version could've been the original sequence (heels not really being a common technique then, or possibly being considered less satisfying to use given bouldering was often considered to be 'training', in the same vein as heels on a board) and that the consequent polishing of the smear that you use to pop up from the rail has led to the establishing of what is now an easier sequence using a heel, and that this idea of the original sequence being the only 'correct' one comes down to whether you believe in the importance of FA sequences...
I'd also say that the use of 'gaslighting' is a bit shoddy, in that the modern application of it in disagreements regarding facts (or even disagreements where fact and opinion become confused) is a bastardisation of a term that was originally used to describe a process of emotional abuse and manipulation that leads the victim to question their grip on reality with the goal of ensuring that they remain within the abusive relationship.
-
Yes but not about the heel hooks which is literally the most widely well known rule about that climb. I don’t need to get a grip when I know for sure, 100% certainty that it’s a real rule that everyone knows and he tries to tell me It’s not. That’s exactly what gaslighting is, trying to make someone think that what they know isn’t true.
Is this the relatively recent Rockfax guide and it stipulates no heels? I had heard of this ‘rule’ but assumed it was a historical relict like so many others in the people that people sensibly and rightly ignored these days.
My other question would be why anyone is using a Rockfax guide for Peak bouldering when they could be using Ru’s excellent book.
-
Wait, Green Traverse has rules??
-
Yes but not about the heel hooks which is literally the most widely well known rule about that climb. I don’t need to get a grip when I know for sure, 100% certainty that it’s a real rule that everyone knows and he tries to tell me It’s not. That’s exactly what gaslighting is, trying to make someone think that what they know isn’t true.
He just said the Rockfax guide doesn't mention a heels rule ("It doesn't prescribe any rules for Green Trav other than the starting hold. All the labelled holds are for the other eliminates around it. It also doesn't mention heels.").
I can't check since I don't own the guide, but if it does then just post a quote... if it doesn't then get a grip since someone pointing out that you're wrong is not "gaslighting" :lol:
Interesting that you know with 100% certainty that everyone knows that rule, since I don't know that rule, though it's probably 10 years since I last did the problem. All I can remember from my early days of going to Stanage (2006-2008 looking at my logbook) was people saying you should stay below the lip, if that makes sense, not rules about which holds or heel hooks or whatever.
As Droyd points out, I think a lot of these "rules" end up coming from people getting pissy about new techniques or holds appearing and making the historical sequence redundant. IMO the solution to this is not to make the climb an eliminate, but just to mention the historical sequence in the description.
-
Yes but not about the heel hooks which is literally the most widely well known rule about that climb. I don’t need to get a grip when I know for sure, 100% certainty that it’s a real rule that everyone knows and he tries to tell me It’s not. That’s exactly what gaslighting is, trying to make someone think that what they know isn’t true.
I don't know why I'm bothering anymore, but not only is it in bad taste for the reasons Droyd pointed out, its also completely false as its not what I wrote. I wrote the Rockfax doesn't mention heels, so we know thats not the origin of the 'rule.' I am aware of the existence of the 'rule,' but its interesting that Barrows isnt.
-
With Green Traverse, I think the original OTE guide from the 90s had the lettered holds and the prescribed sequence. It also had the name as Dope on a Slope from the arête and Green Traverse from the “full” lying down start - so opposite way round to now. Not sure about the first Peak Bouldering Rockfax (the one with B grades) as I’ve no longer got a copy. I can certainly remember doing the “prescribed” sequence on a uni trip in about 1995. I don’t remember any rules about no heels in the guide, but that’s just the way I’ve always done it.
FWIW, I’ve had chats with people at the crag while doing the “strict” sequence when they’ve asked if they can use heels and said do whatever you like (not as militant as Shark!). However, I still always do the strict sequence as I find it significantly harder, particularly now the foothold on the arête (below the starting hold) has deteriorated. The pop move from the rail is just a really satisfying move, albeit contrived, even more so from the start round the corner.
It’s no classic - 1 star at most (maybe 2 at a push for the right hand start, as the extra moves are great), but that block still provides enjoyment for me 25+ years after I first climbed on it.
-
I don’t remember any rules about no heels in the guide, but that’s just the way I’ve always done it.
That fits for me - I think I was too shit at climbing to think about using heels or doing something different to what other people were trying (which I think was the classic sequence). I might have used a heel at the end though?
-
So if you do a heel hook you haven't done the Green Traverse, which begs the question: what have you done? Nothing at all? Shuffled fruitlessly sideways on a slug of gritstone under a tree? Should we retro-name the no-holds-barred version 400 Bin Votes and transfer 95% of UKC logbook entries?
Or perhaps for balance there should be another version where heels are allowed but toes aren't. It would make about as much sense.
I have no idea if I used a heel when I did it ten years ago, but I see I voted one star, contrary to 133/181 voters who regard it as a national classic.
-
Dope on a Slope [sic], B7
Start on hold A and traverse left using everything but the top. Pull around the corner to finish.
-Williams and James, Rockfax, 1998
-
I wish you wouldn’t try and gaslight me
Get a grip, he was only pointing out you'd read it wrong. You even said yourself you might have done ("Maybe I just read that wrong")
Yes but not about the heel hooks which is literally the most widely well known rule about that climb. I don’t need to get a grip when I know for sure, 100% certainty that it’s a real rule that everyone knows and he tries to tell me It’s not. That’s exactly what gaslighting is, trying to make someone think that what they know isn’t true.
I think it was A. J. Ayer who said knowledge is a justified, true belief. So knowledge that heels are banned on the traverse could be a belief, justified (because everyone you've ever spoken to says the same) but it might not be true - which falls short of the knowledge test. For example, Ron sees you on the traverse and asks why you're not using your heels. Obviously the next question is - is the green traverse the peoples problem (with their rules) and no longer Ron's etc.
But this can show why it's not gaslighting when a belief is justified but false.
I digress :-[
-
I think skateboarding has an interesting comparison. People execute tricks with a massively varied style. This tends to be celebrated. I've found people saying "you haven't climbed that properly" to just be a bit weird. Especially since I couldnt imagine policing other peoples ascents, but also because it just seems to be for fun. If people are claiming ascents at a professional level in exchange for income/sponsorship, then that's probably a different thing entirely.
-
Green Traverse (7A) - Rockfax and Vertebrate - go from there to there
Ron's Reach (7A) - Rockfax and Vertebrate - miss out the low rail
Green Traverse Strict (7A) - ukc - low rail, no heels
They're all the same grade and if Martin Veale isn't too bothered, it all seems a bit 'my way of having fun is better than your way'.
Dope on a Slope - start a bit further over for 1/2 a grade.
We'd probably need to go consult George Cukor for the 1944 meaning of Gaslighting. Funnily enough I'd thought this was a Hitchcock movie, which shows the importance of checking your sources. In some cases. He's dead now.
-
Green Traverse (7A) - Rockfax and Vertebrate - go from there to there
Ron's Reach (7A) - Rockfax and Vertebrate - miss out the low rail
Green Traverse Strict (7A) - ukc - low rail, no heels
I always thought Green Traverse using everything was supposed to be 6C+ and people were adamant about no heel hooks to keep it at 7A (although I don't know where I got this idea from). If they are the same grade regardless, then the whole thing seems completely ridiculous.
-
Dope on a Slope [sic], B7
Start on hold A and traverse left using everything but the top. Pull around the corner to finish.
-Williams and James, Rockfax, 1998
Sounds right - I thought I was using the old OTE guide in '95ish. I think Al Williams wrote the OTE guide as well though, so it would be unsurprising if things migrated across.
I can kind of see how people might get the "no heels" thing from that description though - Hold A is basically the top of the boulder, so if you're saying don't use the top for hands and feet then you wouldn't put feet on the hold A which is what everyone does. Massively contrived though, because if you're using it for hands, then why not for feet? It's even more contrived if you start round the corner, because your right leg is on top of the boulder for 2 or 3 moves until you reach hold A but then you're told it must be kept below afterwards!
Green Traverse (7A) - Rockfax and Vertebrate - go from there to there
Ron's Reach (7A) - Rockfax and Vertebrate - miss out the low rail
Green Traverse Strict (7A) - ukc - low rail, no heels
They're all the same grade.
I wonder if this might be the nub of the problem, because they really aren't the same grade (for me at least). In their current state, I'd go with Green Traverse (6C/+), Strict (7A), Ron's Reach (7A/+) depending on if you use heels. If people were less attached to grades, it would all be fine!
-
I'd also say that the use of 'gaslighting' is a bit shoddy, in that the modern application of it in disagreements regarding facts (or even disagreements where fact and opinion become confused) is a bastardisation of a term that was originally used to describe a process of emotional abuse and manipulation that leads the victim to question their grip on reality with the goal of ensuring that they remain within the abusive relationship.
Have we been gaslighted into believing what gaslighting means?
-
L1,R1,L8,R11,L14,R14
World Class 8)
-
Can we just ship the Green Traverse bloc off to somewhere more fitting, i.e. Yorkshire, and then forget about the debacle?
-
L1,R1,L8,R11,L14,R14
World Class 8)
Isn't that the jetpack cheat code?
-
Can we just ship the Green Traverse bloc off to somewhere more fitting, i.e. Yorkshire, and then forget about the debacle?
We've already got one, and it's just as bad https://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,31971
-
I don't think I've ever thought of green trav, the rib or tsunami as eliminates. Tsunami I would consider as a non eliminate problem where there's the option of a "historical sequence" if you want it. I certainly used all holds for that, dancing fish, and press low left. To me eliminates make sense when they create an entirely new/different problem that wouldn't exist otherwise, rather than just a slightly worse sequence on an obvious problem. Having said that, I've always followed the rules at crag x despite their stupidity so I'm clearly inconsistent...
If you dont match the pinch and you use the slot then you did Tsunamish which gets 7C+, it's not optional. There are tons of videos from people getting called out on it. It is literally just a slightly worse sequence on an obvious problem.
-
If you dont match the pinch and you use the slot then you did Tsunamish which gets 7C+, it's not optional. There are tons of videos from people getting called out on it. It is literally just a slightly worse sequence on an obvious problem.
I think the slot appeared some time after the FA so the ‘rule’ was about maintaining a notable move on the original sequence. Seen plenty of vids of people doing it with the logical sequence now. Anyway I’m not sure Tsunami fits into the ‘classic’ category, unless it’s like cars and classic status only denotes age not quality!
Edit: just checked Ru’s guide and the ‘rule’ isn’t stated in there and he’s a peak limestone kingpin!
-
even Shark has a beta comment on UKC saying heels aren’t allowed
Shark is literally the only person I've heard bang on about a no heels rule on the Green traverse. As I recall, when he last did it on here it didn't get much support. It's the sort of retarded thing that should be kept indoors or between close friends.
As an aside, I was once at the Green traverse and some lads asked Big Ron if there were any rules. He said 'Oh I don't know, ask Adam'. So there. I also took Chris Sharma round the Plantation. Twice. I did not question his use of heels at any point, especially as he showed some vision in applying them to the then-unrepeated Brad Pit. But I've never been to Ceuse.
-
If you dont match the pinch and you use the slot then you did Tsunamish which gets 7C+, it's not optional. There are tons of videos from people getting called out on it.
I can assure you that there are quite a few people who would consider the sloper match optional. People like Smitton and Ryan P used to.
I've always considered the obvious and good problem to be a non-eliminate low left sitter, whatever name you want to call it. The elim version is just a worse problem but nice for those that want a historical test/tick. They really don't need different names, people used to just log them saying "with sloper match" or "without sloper match" or similar. You'd have to eliminate the heel too judging by Andy H's comments on old threads if you wanted the historical tick. I guess some people would like to think of it as "Tsunami" and "Tsunamish", and others just as Tsunami with an optional add-on if you want to do a historical sequence.
Incidentally, it's never been in Ru's guides as an elim, which has no doubt had an influence on my view on it since that was the bible when I started bouldering in the peak.
As an aside, I think a lot of these "training" style rules probably came from a time before people realised that it's useful to train to be good at climbing and not just to be strong :lol:
-
If you dont match the pinch and you use the slot then you did Tsunamish which gets 7C+, it's not optional. There are tons of videos from people getting called out on it.
I can assure you that there are quite a few people who would consider the sloper match optional. People like Smitton and Ryan P used to.
I've always considered the obvious and good problem to be a non-eliminate low left sitter, whatever name you want to call it. The elim version is just a worse problem but nice for those that want a historical test/tick. They really don't need different names, people used to just log them saying "with sloper match" or "without sloper match" or similar. You'd have to eliminate the heel too judging by Andy H's comments on old threads if you wanted the historical tick. I guess some people would like to think of it as "Tsunami" and "Tsunamish", and others just as Tsunami with an optional add-on if you want to do a historical sequence.
Incidentally, it's never been in Ru's guides as an elim, which has no doubt had an influence on my view on it since that was the bible when I started bouldering in the peak.
As an aside, I think a lot of these "training" style rules probably came from a time before people realised that it's useful to train to be good at climbing and not just to be strong :lol:
Seems like one of those grey areas where peoples opinions on it varies based on word of mouth and not guidebook stated rules. I personally would do the original sequence just for the sake of getting the grade and avoiding people telling me I did Tsunamish. I suppose it depends on how much of a grade chaser you are and if you mind being slagged off.
-
Can we just ship the Green Traverse bloc off to somewhere more fitting, i.e. Yorkshire, and then forget about the debacle?
I was just enjoying the fact that for once a thread like this is about a problem in the Peak, not Yorkshire.
Also fascinated by the fact it's the youngsters arguing FOR rules, and the oldies (sorry, relative term) arguing against. Real role reversal.
-
I personally would do the original sequence just for the sake of getting the grade and avoiding people telling me I did Tsunamish. I suppose it depends on how much of a grade chaser you are and if you mind being slagged off.
I would rather climb the better problem, which for me is the non-elim, then you can always go back for the eliminate version when bored. But then I think the non-elim is ~8A anyway, and don't care much for the opinions of those who think that needless rules are a good idea for the default problem rather than being an add-on for locals...
Given the bit in bold I hope you won't be using the heel?
-
Also fascinated by the fact it's the youngsters arguing FOR rules, and the oldies (sorry, relative term) arguing against. Real role reversal.
Yeah, weird! Need Harris or Jasper or someone back to argue the case for eliminates for the old skool perspective
-
Also fascinated by the fact it's the youngsters arguing FOR rules, and the oldies (sorry, relative term) arguing against. Real role reversal.
Yeah, weird! Need Harris or Jasper or someone back to argue the case for eliminates for the old skool perspective
Carlos is an old man in my eyes!
-
I also took Chris Sharma round the Plantation. Twice. I did not question his use of heels at any point, especially as he showed some vision in applying them to the then-unrepeated Brad Pit. But I've never been to Ceuse.
Does he say hi?
I thought it was Le Menestral who discovered the heel to do Brad Pit
-
Also fascinated by the fact it's the youngsters arguing FOR rules, and the oldies (sorry, relative term) arguing against. Real role reversal.
Yeah, weird! Need Harris or Jasper or someone back to argue the case for eliminates for the old skool perspective
Adam is young and wrong, as the young so often are. Heels are wrong and ugly, on the Green Traverse and in many other places.
-
Varian the Librarian at 7A+/8A has some very specific rules and is known for being an outstanding independent line
-
To add some absurdity to this, I just perused the insta of one of the "pro rules on The Green Trav" posters on this thread... to find a vid of them doing the eliminate dyno from the rail on green trav to the top (nowadays seems to be called Green Slap)... with a heel on :shrug:
OK, so Ru's guide doesn't technically say no heels, but it does say it's an elim and to dyno from the rail to the top, so how you would think that its not "against the rules" to use a heel on a hold that's eliminated for hands, avoiding what is surely the "point" of the eliminate (which presumably is to force a big slap as per the name), but think that the trav has rules is a mystery to me... :shrug: I'm baffled. Is it all Rockfax's fault as per usual??
-
To add some absurdity to this, I just perused the insta of one of the "pro rules on The Green Trav" posters on this thread... to find a vid of them doing the eliminate dyno from the rail on green trav to the top (nowadays seems to be called Green Slap)... with a heel on :shrug:
OK, so Ru's guide doesn't technically say no heels, but it does say it's an elim and to dyno from the rail to the top, so how you would think that its not "against the rules" to use a heel on a hold that's eliminated for hands, avoiding what is surely the "point" of the eliminate (which presumably is to force a big slap as per the name), but think that the trav has rules is a mystery to me... :shrug: I'm baffled. Is it all Rockfax's fault as per usual??
We should publically execute them
-
I think skateboarding has an interesting comparison. People execute tricks with a massively varied style. This tends to be celebrated. I've found people saying "you haven't climbed that properly" to just be a bit weird. Especially since I couldnt imagine policing other peoples ascents, but also because it just seems to be for fun. If people are claiming ascents at a professional level in exchange for income/sponsorship, then that's probably a different thing entirely.
I actually agree with the sentiment that people can and should climb things in any style they would like, but skateboarding has its own ethics and I wouldn't agree that all styles are celebrated. E.g. simply wearing a helmet could get you called out. Like with climbing, there are clear rules; dab on your kickflip and it's back around!
-
To add some absurdity to this, I just perused the insta of one of the "pro rules on The Green Trav" posters on this thread... to find a vid of them doing the eliminate dyno from the rail on green trav to the top (nowadays seems to be called Green Slap)... with a heel on :shrug:
OK, so Ru's guide doesn't technically say no heels, but it does say it's an elim and to dyno from the rail to the top, so how you would think that its not "against the rules" to use a heel on a hold that's eliminated for hands, avoiding what is surely the "point" of the eliminate (which presumably is to force a big slap as per the name), but think that the trav has rules is a mystery to me... :shrug: I'm baffled. Is it all Rockfax's fault as per usual??
Just so we’re all clear I’m not pro rules at all, I’m just saying that’s what I’ve been told. I climbed it with heels like a normal person haha. This thread was started as a way to discuss all these classics with weird rules that’s all, I never said I agreed. Oh and UKC says any feet for green slap
-
I wouldn't listen to ukc, that's the first issue!
I think the main thing this thread has pointed out is the difference between "classics" which have that status due to quality (of climbing, line, rock, holds - e.g. West Side Story, Crescent Arete) and "classics" which have that status due to historical accident and popularity (first of the grade, in an influential film, soft, or just seem to become "the thing you do at x" e.g. Green Traverse, Hubble). Someone on here referred to the first as classics and the second as testpieces, which I think is a nice distinctio. Using that distinction, I guess I can think of lots of testpieces that might have dumb rules, but not so many classics
(After a post earlier, I looked up my old logbook and I'm happy to see I also voted 1 star for Green Trav)
-
skateboarding has its own ethics and I wouldn't agree that all styles are celebrated. E.g. simply wearing a helmet could get you called out.
I watched some of the Olympic skateboarding and it was obvious that they were obliged to wear helmets but all had the chinstrap as loose as possible to still look cool. Whenever they fell off (do you still say “slammed”? I was a teenager last time I was on a skateboard :lol: ) the helmet would therefore come off in mid air, not protecting their head and often strangling them on impact :???:.
Whenever people try to say “in road biking/ fell running/ skiing/ rollerblading/ fishing/ surfing/ wakeboarding/ weightlifting etc. people do this” to make a point relating to climbing though it’s usually irrelevant though. There’s a reason the customs of different outdoor/ physical pursuits have evolved different customs and it’s usually because they’re all fundamentally different activities.
-
I thought it was Le Menestral who discovered the heel to do Brad Pit
Jeez, no. Menestrel used his toe, as did Spoon. Who got the heel to work does not seem to have been recorded or remembered, which is weird in a way given how effective it is. But people rarely pay much attention to fourth place. Darren Stevenson did it pretty early iirc.
-
I think skateboarding has an interesting comparison. People execute tricks with a massively varied style. This tends to be celebrated. I've found people saying "you haven't climbed that properly" to just be a bit weird. Especially since I couldnt imagine policing other peoples ascents, but also because it just seems to be for fun. If people are claiming ascents at a professional level in exchange for income/sponsorship, then that's probably a different thing entirely.
I actually agree with the sentiment that people can and should climb things in any style they would like, but skateboarding has its own ethics and I wouldn't agree that all styles are celebrated. E.g. simply wearing a helmet could get you called out. Like with climbing, there are clear rules; dab on your kickflip and it's back around!
A dab isn't like using your heel though right? A dab is failing to do a trick just like it is in bouldering. I'm talking about boning out an ollie as opposed to just an ordinary ollie as a comparison. I agree that there is accepted style (ripping on people for pushing mongo) but generally, people don't go as far to say that trick X wasn't completed because of that. I don't think skaters take it as seriously
-
If you dont match the pinch and you use the slot then you did Tsunamish which gets 7C+, it's not optional. There are tons of videos from people getting called out on it.
I can assure you that there are quite a few people who would consider the sloper match optional. People like Smitton and Ryan P used to.
I've always considered the obvious and good problem to be a non-eliminate low left sitter, whatever name you want to call it. The elim version is just a worse problem but nice for those that want a historical test/tick. They really don't need different names, people used to just log them saying "with sloper match" or "without sloper match" or similar. You'd have to eliminate the heel too judging by Andy H's comments on old threads if you wanted the historical tick. I guess some people would like to think of it as "Tsunami" and "Tsunamish", and others just as Tsunami with an optional add-on if you want to do a historical sequence.
Incidentally, it's never been in Ru's guides as an elim, which has no doubt had an influence on my view on it since that was the bible when I started bouldering in the peak.
As an aside, I think a lot of these "training" style rules probably came from a time before people realised that it's useful to train to be good at climbing and not just to be strong :lol:
We used to do it all possible ways to make sure.
-
I did the Green Traverse for the first time in 1986 or maybe early 1987, as per the name it was livid green and literally the only holds clean were those on what people describe as the eliminate version. Starting blob, the guppy hold, the drop down to the edge and the hold you go for off that and the vague edge and finishing jug. All the heel hooks were etc were covered in shite and not used, hence that is what I would consider the original green traverse. Hence later on when boots actually had a heel that would do something and holds became cleaner different sequences were used.
BTW the chips were pre climbing/documenting of T crack,, generally we would avoid them to make a point!
-
I haven't paid much attention to others, but the heels I use are on the starting and finishing jugs.
-
I thought it was Le Menestral who discovered the heel to do Brad Pit
Jeez, no. Menestrel used his toe, as did Spoon. Who got the heel to work does not seem to have been recorded or remembered, which is weird in a way given how effective it is. But people rarely pay much attention to fourth place. Darren Stevenson did it pretty early iirc.
According to my infallible memory, I saw Steve McClure discover it, probably in '98.
Many classics in Font with arbitrary rules, Piano and Medaille en Chocolate come to mind.
Carlos Traversi doing the Dominator using the original sequence probably also fits here.
-
I think the main thing this thread has pointed out is the difference between "classics" which have that status due to quality (of climbing, line, rock, holds - e.g. West Side Story, Crescent Arete) and "classics" which have that status due to historical accident and popularity...
Doesn't West Side Story have an arbitrary rule to not do Ron-Side Force-It? :popcorn:
Careless Torque: 'don't take the line of least resistance into Not to be Taken Away'
Big Boss - 'don't weight the inevitable ass dab'
Deliverance: 'don't be really tall'
The Sphinx: 'don't do it because you might break Voyager'
Soudain Seul: 'only paperback books allowed under your kneepad'
-
Varian the Librarian at 7A+/8A has some very specific rules and is known for being an outstanding independent line
LOL I missed all of this, top stuff. As is some of the other stuff on this thread.
-
Was planning on going to bed before I found this thread. Oh well...
-
Someone mentioned this could be an interesting thread on the “should we document everything?” Thread so here we go. What are some “classic” boulders with arbitrary rules that would mean they’re not classics by todays standards
Does 'arbitrary rules' just mean 'contrived/eliminate'? :P
-
Honourary Caley up the slope also has a rule to stay off the sidepulls next to the crack, but that was ace. I did it in conditions so cold and crisp my mouth was drying out on the walk-up and at one point i cut loose on it (on a slab?!).
is my left hand in the pic below on the sidepull that's 'out' for this? had a quick look and pretty much every vid i found had people using this hold (many with their right hands first for some strange reason)
(https://imgcdn.ukc2.com/i/396934?fm=webp&time=1667030716&dpr=1&w=1200&s=6faa83b1c6a20fc80b55e4ecadff103f)
-
No.
-
Honourary Caley up the slope also has a rule to stay off the sidepulls next to the crack, but that was ace. I did it in conditions so cold and crisp my mouth was drying out on the walk-up and at one point i cut loose on it (on a slab?!).
is my left hand in the pic below on the sidepull that's 'out' for this? had a quick look and pretty much every vid i found had people using this hold (many with their right hands first for some strange reason)
(https://imgcdn.ukc2.com/i/396934?fm=webp&time=1667030716&dpr=1&w=1200&s=6faa83b1c6a20fc80b55e4ecadff103f)
Despite having proposed this problem as a candidate, I can't remember for the life of me looking at that picture!! I defer any further questioning to a knowledgeable Stanage resident / slab guru.....oh.....
-
Pretty sure it's the ones up and left of his left hand, next to the tick mark, basically on the arete.