UKBouldering.com

the shizzle => news => Topic started by: Will Hunt on March 24, 2019, 12:24:01 am

Title: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 24, 2019, 12:24:01 am
The young ground up would be very impressive. You can jump from the crux but the top bit at 9-10 m is still pretty tricky.

Franco did The Young ground-up today (well, yesterday since I'm posting after midnight).
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: gme on March 24, 2019, 02:15:26 pm
Nice one Franco. Great bit of climbing that.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2019, 09:37:33 am
Good going that youth.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: mark20 on March 25, 2019, 01:55:09 pm
The young ground up would be very impressive. You can jump from the crux but the top bit at 9-10 m is still pretty tricky.

Franco did The Young ground-up today (well, yesterday since I'm posting after midnight).
Write up on his blog -
https://francocookson.wordpress.com/
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: monkoffunk on March 25, 2019, 02:12:30 pm
Ha, Franco always leaves room for some debate or other!

For those who like to criticise surely it’s not really criticism to say he did an easier link up and didn’t actually climb the route at all? Fair enough though, clearly it’s good enough for him!
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: mr chaz on March 25, 2019, 02:24:09 pm
Right, so he missed out the bottom of the route which he likens to West Side Story... and opted for the VS crack instead?  :-\
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: 36chambers on March 25, 2019, 02:29:56 pm
#trollface
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2019, 02:46:48 pm
Strange justification.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: ferret on March 25, 2019, 02:49:30 pm
Right, so he missed out the bottom of the route which he likens to West Side Story... and opted for the VS crack instead?  :-\
I think he used it to do the top without being boxed from the hard start,did most of the moves but then fell off. Armed with some for-knowledge of the moves and having confidence that you can fall from high and walk away he climbed the full line. Very impressive and an improvement in style though maybe not quite the same as doing the line ground up starting up the actual route everytime. True ground up still up for grabs for me.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: 36chambers on March 25, 2019, 02:53:02 pm
Right, so he missed out the bottom of the route which he likens to West Side Story... and opted for the VS crack instead?  :-\

if one were to traverse into the jug on WSS and then top it out do they get the full tick?? Asking for a friend.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: dunnyg on March 25, 2019, 02:55:22 pm
I was thinking of doing the top of Jason's roof, just get a leg up for the first half...
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: mark20 on March 25, 2019, 02:58:34 pm
Right, so he missed out the bottom of the route which he likens to West Side Story... and opted for the VS crack instead?  :-\
I think he used it to do the top without being boxed from the hard start,did most of the moves but then fell off. Armed with some for-knowledge of the moves and having confidence that you can fall from high and walk away he climbed the full line. Very impressive and an improvement in style though maybe not quite the same as doing the line ground up starting up the actual route everytime. True ground up still up for grabs for me.
I thought that at first, but at the end it's clear - "...even if the time I got up it happened to be the time I skipped the start"

I assume the comparison to WSS is the nature of the climbing at the start, technical and on the feet (ie would be shit and horrible if eroded/sandy), rather than the route being over at half height.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on March 25, 2019, 03:00:37 pm
Right, so he missed out the bottom of the route which he likens to West Side Story... and opted for the VS crack instead?  :-\
I think he used it to do the top without being boxed from the hard start,did most of the moves but then fell off. Armed with some for-knowledge of the moves and having confidence that you can fall from high and walk away he climbed the full line.

I don't think that's what he did. This quote from the blog seems pretty unequivocal:

"There’s obvious room for those that like to criticise to say that I didn’t climb the whole thing, as I missed out the boulder start. I can see their point totally. For me the big challenge was unpicking the top without having inspected the line and I’m really pleased I was able to do that, even if the time I got up it happened to be the time I skipped the start."

Edit: What Mark said, he and I must have been posting at the same time.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 25, 2019, 03:01:53 pm
I've heard it described as 7B into 7B into 7B but can't remember who said it and to what extent it was a throwaway comment.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: dunnyg on March 25, 2019, 03:07:57 pm
Whatever he did climb looks pretty wild either way.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: SA Chris on March 25, 2019, 03:08:55 pm
Right, so he missed out the bottom of the route which he likens to West Side Story... and opted for the VS crack instead?  :-\

if one were to traverse into the jug on WSS and then top it out do they get the full tick?? Asking for a friend.

Only if they have (nearly?) done the bottom part first.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 25, 2019, 03:31:05 pm
This is great. 2 cap doffs in the 36 hours after I first posted. Within 1.5 hours of the first sighting of controversy there are 12 posts!

FWIW, when I posted I didn't know the full details, but I still would have posted had I known. It's a compromise and there's still a prize out there to be had, but I agree with dunny - it sounds like a wild few moments on the rock.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: 36chambers on March 25, 2019, 03:58:00 pm
This is great. 2 cap doffs in the 36 hours after I first posted. Within 1.5 hours of the first sighting of controversy there are 12 posts!

I almost replied to your original post to ponder whether a highball 7C+ was a "significant repeat", so it was very nearly 3 replies pre-controversy ;D
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Franco on March 25, 2019, 04:01:49 pm
Christ! I thought I had out-manoeuvred the UKB sloops with my pre-emptive admissions.

To make it clear: I have done the bottom boulder problem many times (20?), the middle boulder problem about 15, and the top one once. They're all quite hard for me, but easyish if you know how to do them, or you're good at bouldering. Will's 7b,7b,7b isn't miles off. The middle one is probably the hardest (and by far the coolest), the bottom one could be anywhere from font 7a- 7b+, the top one could be low font 7s, but is hard to figure out and scary - potentially on a rope it wouldn't be that bad.

Physically, obviously, doing the initial boulder problem adds something. You get that skin-roughing, the odd cold finger and the mental aspect of feeling like you've already done some hard climbing, but I have no doubt that anyone who could do the individual bits could do the whole thing. I wasn't pumped at the top even when I'd done the first two boulder problems, just scared. It was basically a toss up between probably having more sessions on it and damaging it more, or just getting it done. As good as the start is, it gets really boring just climbing it over and over again.

I think all the people at the crag agreed that the place is great, the wall one of the best in the country, the moves the best in the county, but the line slightly wack. I struggle to think of a comparison, but it's remarkable how similar in grade all three sections are and how easy it is to slink off at each point. If it wasn't escapble, it would be truly one of the best anywhere. I didn't want to kind of come out and criticise the route, because it is really beautiful, amazing and worth doing, but I think people repeating it in the future will see what I mean - it feels quite artificial.

I think a boulderer's mindset gives a different view of things like this to a Trad climbers and allows for things to be slightly more squeezed, but for me I've unpicked all of the sequences of The Young and am dead happy with it. I've put time into being as accurate and honest about what I did as possible, so really am not looking for controversy. Like I said in my blog, I can see why you might say it's not the full tick etc, but let's keep it nice!

Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: monkoffunk on March 25, 2019, 04:31:47 pm
Christ! I thought I had out-manoeuvred the UKB sloops with my pre-emptive admissions.

To make it clear: I have done the bottom boulder problem many times (20?), the middle boulder problem about 15, and the top one once. They're all quite hard for me, but easyish if you know how to do them, or you're good at bouldering. Will's 7b,7b,7b isn't miles off. The middle one is probably the hardest (and by far the coolest), the bottom one could be anywhere from font 7a- 7b+, the top one could be low font 7s, but is hard to figure out and scary - potentially on a rope it wouldn't be that bad.

Physically, obviously, doing the initial boulder problem adds something. You get that skin-roughing, the odd cold finger and the mental aspect of feeling like you've already done some hard climbing, but I have no doubt that anyone who could do the individual bits could do the whole thing. I wasn't pumped at the top even when I'd done the first two boulder problems, just scared. It was basically a toss up between probably having more sessions on it and damaging it more, or just getting it done. As good as the start is, it gets really boring just climbing it over and over again.

I think all the people at the crag agreed that the place is great, the wall one of the best in the country, the moves the best in the county, but the line slightly wack. I struggle to think of a comparison, but it's remarkable how similar in grade all three sections are and how easy it is to slink off at each point. If it wasn't escapble, it would be truly one of the best anywhere. I didn't want to kind of come out and criticise the route, because it is really beautiful, amazing and worth doing, but I think people repeating it in the future will see what I mean - it feels quite artificial.

I think a boulderer's mindset gives a different view of things like this to a Trad climbers and allows for things to be slightly more squeezed, but for me I've unpicked all of the sequences of The Young and am dead happy with it. I've put time into being as accurate and honest about what I did as possible, so really am not looking for controversy. Like I said in my blog, I can see why you might say it's not the full tick etc, but let's keep it nice!

I think most of the posts were just trying to clarify exactly what had been done.

I don’t think there is any criticism, as I said before, and you’ve been totally honest about how you climbed a bit of rock in the way you wanted.

So it’s all good.

However it is simply a technicality that this isn’t a ground up ascent of that route and it’s not a significant repeat, because it isn’t a repeat. Clearly not without significance though and especially in the significance to you!
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on March 25, 2019, 04:45:33 pm
I've put time into being as accurate and honest about what I did as possible, so really am not looking for controversy

Fair play to you Franco, you're very clear about what you did (and why) here and in the blog. I'm sure no controversy was intended. Unfortunately you were unwittingly pipped to the post by Will with news that, no doubt unintentionally, proved to be a bit misleading. I'm glad you got so much out of it, that's what matters.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: gme on March 25, 2019, 06:15:47 pm
Franco- Well done for doing that top section ground up from the jug. Its a long way up there and the fall you took makes me wince thinking about it. If you have fallen from the last move i suspect you wouldn't have walked away.

However you have not done the young only two thirds of it as did the other ascents who traversed off left. I am pretty sure that top 7A section would feel harder after doing the 1st two 7B+ sections rather than a VS and a 7B+ section. I totally understand your reasons for doing it as you have but you have not done the route.

For you to say the line is wack seems unbelievable and the same could be said of a vast majority of routes in the country never mind the county. Anyone who walked up to the wall and looked at what you did would say its illogical and the route obviously goes straight up the wall.

I am not in anyway having a go at you and am seriously impressed in your efforts to do it ground up but to suggest that a trad climbers eye makes your way more logical is just not correct. If it was all about finding the easiest way to the top the sport/hobby would have died a death decades ago.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 25, 2019, 06:40:44 pm
Q: What’s the difference between a trad climber who boulders and a boulderer who trad climbs?

A: About 3 e grades
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 26, 2019, 03:56:48 pm
PS, although I don't know this venue I've got a lot of sympathy for Franco's pragmatism. It's not unusual for FAers and their cheerleaders to overlook major quality issues if the line ends up looking like the solution to the cool bit of rock. Longer term, ground-up repeats have a habit of finding what's logical. I put this down to a more authentic approach vs rehearsal, but I'm sure y'all will have no truck with that.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: gme on March 26, 2019, 04:17:52 pm
JB - Have a look at the pictures on UKC. I dont have the technical ability to share them on here.

What he does is totally off line and to say that the wall isnt a logical line is just bollocks. It even follows a coloured streak of slightly different sandstone.

He climbs a crack that is meters away from the climbing and that avoids half of the hard climbing. At no point do you have to avoid the crack but at one point (possibly 2) you can traverse off to it. Hes statement that the crack is 3 inches from his foot at the jug is miss leading as well as it suggests that you are trying to avoid using it.

I am not having a go at Franco as its impressive doing the top wall ground up, however it is only 7A and maybe not even newsworthy on its own. Doing two 6/7 move 7b+s to get there then doing the 7A bit is a totally different proposition. The fact that you have to go up and down it jumping off numerous times is the whole point, its how we did things in the county for years before high balling was invented, i must have bailed off his eminence and Poseidon a dozen times before i did them.

The article is also incorrect in saying Dan did a right hand variation. The original way Andy did it stepped right at the top back onto the jug then went up just as Dan and Franco have done, its described such in the guide.  Going straight up from after the pockets would be much harder than anything on the rest of the route.

I think this is one of the best routes/highballs in the UK and Franco has missed out on perhaps the best highball ever done so far. Something its obvious he was capable of but for some reason hes chosen to sully it.

I would also like to know when it was "glued" as it wasn't a few years ago when i tried it, or i didn't think it was.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: teestub on March 26, 2019, 04:40:29 pm
Here’s the vid that is on UKC for reference, does a good job of showing where the crack is in relation to the climb.

https://vimeo.com/46230928
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 26, 2019, 05:37:02 pm
Okay fair do's that does look like bullshit now I've seen the vid!
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Moo on March 26, 2019, 06:04:06 pm
I recall going to look at this with Andy Cowley many moons ago before it had been repeated. I must confess that franco's write up left me scratching my chin a bit but it was a while ago so I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

However having seen the video and refreshed my memory, I've gotta say, Franco what are you on about? It doesn't matter how much word salad you throw at your description you still didn't do it the bloody thing. Yeah you climbed some easier variation and kudos to you for being honest in a round about way, but why not just say that instead of making excuses.

Better still, get yourself back up there and get it done bottom to top, you're clearly capable as per your description and it's one of the best highball boulder problems anywhere, so crack on.


Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Bradders on March 26, 2019, 06:57:30 pm
From my armchair perspective watching the video, particularly 30s to 1min when Ned does the first boulder problem, starting up the crack looks to be the equivalent of starting off a ladder, I.e. you're still up high trying moves without prior inspection etc. but you're not ground up.

Or to put it another way, it's like stepping off the Matterhorn to do the top of Chiasmata at the Cliff; fine if you want to work the top out and void the ground up but you've not done the problem!

In short, this is in no way a ground up ascent of The Young; this is an admittedly still fairly impressive case of "worked and did the top of the problem, need to come back for the link", in my humble opinion.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2019, 07:24:20 pm
While we're all giving Franco a hard time, please bear in mind that Franco has merely written a blog and posted an Instagram about what he's done which, for him if noone else, is a significant piece of climbing.

Unfortunately I posted up on the significant repeats thread without first hearing the caveats. My bad.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: IanP on March 26, 2019, 07:46:47 pm
Got to admit that having watched the vid it didn't seem that far off what Franco said assuming I'm looking at it right. 

Obviously missed some hard climbing but the big resting hold is to the right and pretty close to the crack he climbed up.  And doesn't look to me to have missed 2/3 of the climbing and if its 'only 7a' some pretty strong climbers appeared to be have some difficulties with the moves from the jug.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: countyyoungin on March 26, 2019, 07:48:13 pm
Get back up and do the whole thing, your capable of it. Get it done innit. I tried this for a session with Franco and he did the bottom half so I can confirm he can do the whole thing. He just seems to deliberately land himself if these debates ahah
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: monkoffunk on March 26, 2019, 07:56:55 pm
Devils advocate here, do you think maybe it’s because alongside the very honest description of what he did there is a blog post titled with a route name that he didn’t do and an awful lot of description about the legendary status of a route that he didn’t do? And a name and a grade written in the Instagram post, again of a route he didn’t climb?

It just seems odd to publiscise something he describes as personally meaningful in that way, when you haven’t done the legendary route in question.

Again, it’s great he has done something meaningful to him but it’s pretty obvious when you then promote such an ascent that it is going to draw some comment. 

Edit: And don’t get me wrong, I’m personally impressed by the boldness and the difficulty of what he has done. Obviously it’s well above the level of most.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Danny on March 26, 2019, 07:57:46 pm
Got to admit that having watched the vid it didn't seem that far off what Franco said assuming I'm looking at it right. 
I agree. Clearly have to keep the blinkers on at one point.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Franco on March 26, 2019, 08:06:47 pm
Get back up and do the whole thing, your capable of it. Get it done innit. I tried this for a session with Franco and he did the bottom half so I can confirm he can do the whole thing. He just seems to deliberately land himself if these debates ahah

It's weird. It didn't cross my mind after I topped out to do the whole thing again. I'd been wondering for a while which line was best and was in two minds, but when I did it I was just happy and the atmosphere was definitely one of completing it. If I'd done it from the start each time, it would only have been to satisfy other people. I see why as a boulder problem, you want to climb the whole thing, but the top feels like a route, so maybe it's kinda caught in limbo.

Anyway, I'm totally happy with what I did and we had another new line to try at a different crag in the afternoon (no luck on that), so left pretty early.  If I was up there with pads again, I suppose I could go up it without great risk now I know how to do the top, but I'd prefer to climb one of the other great highballs here abouts, or Trad projects etc...

I watched the video of Ned F trying it. It does look less escapeable on there. Maybe I'm just bigger or it's more my bag? I've uploaded my own video of the start from an early go, showing the section of climbing we're on about and the rest being close to the crack (looks like NF misses the right foothold, thus the good rest). You can clearly see it would be a minor reach into the crack. Like I say, I really don't think what we're on about is a big deal, but if others do, so be it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXwmE26xZBQ&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: El Mocho on March 26, 2019, 08:38:29 pm
Why did the vid stop there? I was getting into it. Good spotting, nice dog, those stupid trousers you wear, highball problem - all the makings of a classic.

I like how you wear a helmet, makes me think of Tom De Gay.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: countyyoungin on March 26, 2019, 08:44:00 pm
 :chair:I suppose in my mind I wouldn’t be done until I had completed it from bottom to top like Andy did it originally. If your trying to get the same experience as the FA then that’s where youv got to climb. But what ever floats your boat really I suppose, like I said the top would have been very exiting non the less so kudos for that. But you know what I think I wanted to stick to my guns that day and tried it from the start Andy used rather than the crack (I think I had one go like that but kind of felt like I was ruining the challenge for myself and put in a half arsed effort) but that’s just because I wanted to do what Earl did to prove to myself I could climb it like him. For me it’s about aiming to improve or meet standard. That’s what drove me (and Alex) to do that dark side like we did. Is there still room for improvement? Definitely but I don’t think Franco’s that arsed he did want he wanted to do
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: teestub on March 26, 2019, 09:17:51 pm
Franco, seeing as you started up the crack, did you think about placing some side runners (or runners I guess) to protect the top, or would the crack not take good gear (hard to tell from the vid)?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: bendavison on March 26, 2019, 10:22:49 pm
Quote from: Franco
Like I say, I really don't think what we're on about is a big deal, but if others do, so be it.

As a couple others have said, it's great that you've been (relatively) honest about your approach/style etc, but I think the contention is that you claimed (at the surface) to have climbed The Young when you did not. Yes, you explained what you did in your blog but the lazy reader may not have got that far through.

Also, the way you have written your blog is misleading: (1) you're not clear about the breakdown of the climb; (2) you claim there are two rests when there is only one, and you suggest the rest is better than it is (in your vid, for example, you shake out just a couple times). In doing so (bigging up the rest), you seem to be implying that the bottom boulder doesn't add difficulty to the overall climb, and therefore that what you climbed is of comparable difficulty i.e. doing the bottom is the same as starting from the crack, because either way you get the rest. This might be true if you're Ramon J-P or Seb Bouin, but I'd bet isn't true for you. (3) you don't give an overall assessment of the difficulty of the climb you did and how it might differ from that of The Young. Instead you imply that the route you climbed is of comparable difficulty, which I'm confident is not true.

Basically, it comes across as if you're trying to say either that (1) you climbed the young or something of comparable difficulty and boldness. I don't think what you did is as bold as The Young as you'd have been more tired at the top had you climbed the bottom, and therefore more likely to fall off; or (2) although you didn't climb the Young, you could have if you thought it was the best line, and doing so wouldn't have been harder than what you did climb. This makes your blog come across as somewhat disingenuous at worst or poorly-written at best.

It reads as deliberate deception in order to big up your achievement. This might not be true, but it's the way it comes across.

:chair:I suppose in my mind I wouldn’t be done until I had completed it from bottom to top like Andy did it originally. If your trying to get the same experience as the FA then that’s where youv got to climb. But what ever floats your boat really I suppose, like I said the top would have been very exiting non the less so kudos for that. But you know what I think I wanted to stick to my guns that day and tried it from the start Andy used rather than the crack (I think I had one go like that but kind of felt like I was ruining the challenge for myself and put in a half arsed effort) but that’s just because I wanted to do what Earl did to prove to myself I could climb it like him. For me it’s about aiming to improve or meet standard. That’s what drove me (and Alex) to do that dark side like we did. Is there still room for improvement? Definitely but I don’t think Franco’s that arsed he did want he wanted to do

In short, he didn't do The Young. The rest of this comes across as bragging and excuse making for having not done it - there's no need.

Quote from: Franco
I'd been wondering for a while which line was best

Sorry but I really struggle to believe this. Going up the center is the obvious line and the obvious challenge. In my mind, it is far more contrived to say 'you're allowed the crack up to there, but then you have to leave it' than to say 'just don't use the crack'.

Quote from: Franco
I see why as a boulder problem, you want to climb the whole thing, but the top feels like a route, so maybe it's kinda caught in limbo.

Really? Surely part of the challenge of doing it is the difficulty, whether it's a route or a boulder. The bottom boulder adds considerable difficulty to the climb as a whole and would have made the top harder.

I don't mean to take away from what you did, only to try and make it clear where the contention has arisen.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 26, 2019, 10:30:51 pm
It seems from the vid that runners in the crack would not protect the upper section Tim, and popping off any lower down would result in a pretty miserable sweeping fall with gear in. Best off with a pile of mats safety wise.
The parallel with WSS is a good one as a lot of people climb the bottom and traverse off claiming the ‘tick’. This appears the other way round.
Not climbing the original start into the top is to not climb the line - that is an indisputable fact. I can really understand county youngin’s desire to climb this in original style, as this might feel more complete or whole in some way.
Does this make the ascent better or worse, good or bad, to me not at all. It just is what it is. The suggestion in the thread that Franco should go back and do the route properly is an interesting one. The ascent in its current form reminds me of Gary Gibson bringing the rock down to ‘his level’. That’s what we all do when climbing naturally lends itself to ideas of success vs failure.
One thing that I am curious about is the need to identify with being a particular type of climber e.g a ‘trad climber’ and in doing this create an opposing position. The irony being that no such thing really exists particularly in the form in which this route was climbed
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: countyyoungin on March 26, 2019, 10:38:34 pm
Quote from: Franco
Like I say, I really don't think what we're on about is a big deal, but if others do, so be it.

As a couple others have said, it's great that you've been (relatively) honest about your approach/style etc, but I think the contention is that you claimed (at the surface) to have climbed The Young when you did not. Yes, you explained what you did in your blog but the lazy reader may not have got that far through.

Also, the way you have written your blog is misleading: (1) you're not clear about the breakdown of the climb; (2) you claim there are two rests when there is only one, and you suggest the rest is better than it is (in your vid, for example, you shake out just a couple times). In doing so (bigging up the rest), you seem to be implying that the bottom boulder doesn't add difficulty to the overall climb, and therefore that what you climbed is of comparable difficulty i.e. doing the bottom is the same as starting from the crack, because either way you get the rest. This might be true if you're Ramon J-P or Seb Bouin, but I'd bet isn't true for you. (3) you don't give an overall assessment of the difficulty of the climb you did and how it might differ from that of The Young. Instead you imply that the route you climbed is of comparable difficulty, which I'm confident is not true.

Basically, it comes across as if you're trying to say either that (1) you climbed the young or something of comparable difficulty and boldness. I don't think what you did is as bold as The Young as you'd have been more tired at the top had you climbed the bottom, and therefore more likely to fall off; or (2) although you didn't climb the Young, you could have if you thought it was the best line, and doing so wouldn't have been harder than what you did climb. This makes your blog come across as somewhat disingenuous at worst or poorly-written at best.

It reads as deliberate deception in order to big up your achievement. This might not be true, but it's the way it comes across.

:chair:I suppose in my mind I wouldn’t be done until I had completed it from bottom to top like Andy did it originally. If your trying to get the same experience as the FA then that’s where youv got to climb. But what ever floats your boat really I suppose, like I said the top would have been very exiting non the less so kudos for that. But you know what I think I wanted to stick to my guns that day and tried it from the start Andy used rather than the crack (I think I had one go like that but kind of felt like I was ruining the challenge for myself and put in a half arsed effort) but that’s just because I wanted to do what Earl did to prove to myself I could climb it like him. For me it’s about aiming to improve or meet standard. That’s what drove me (and Alex) to do that dark side like we did. Is there still room for improvement? Definitely but I don’t think Franco’s that arsed he did want he wanted to do

In short, he didn't do The Young. The rest of this comes across as bragging and excuse making for having not done it - there's no need.

Quote from: Franco
I'd been wondering for a while which line was best

Sorry but I really struggle to believe this. Going up the center is the obvious line and the obvious challenge. In my mind, it is far more contrived to say 'you're allowed the crack up to there, but then you have to leave it' than to say 'just don't use the crack'.

Quote from: Franco
I see why as a boulder problem, you want to climb the whole thing, but the top feels like a route, so maybe it's kinda caught in limbo.

Really? Surely part of the challenge of doing it is the difficulty, whether it's a route or a boulder. The bottom boulder adds considerable difficulty to the climb as a whole and would have made the top harder.

I don't mean to take away from what you did, only to try and make it clear where the contention has arisen.

Ha. I’m not making excuses nor am I bragging. Sorry did I say I could do it? No. Could I do that climb in a session? Could I fuck. Giving my account on the route (wth Franco) and yes trying to say he hadn’t done it but in a fairly nice way don’t think that’s bad thing.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: 36chambers on March 26, 2019, 10:50:55 pm
Franco, just call it an FA and call it a day. The Foung 7C, 3 stars.

If the start to the other problem does fall apart then your line becomes the star attraction :smartass:
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2019, 10:57:13 pm
I've lost track of who has been up this bit of rock now. Is it fair to say that, in fact, nobody has repeated Earl's The Young? Dan used a different sequence on the crux which doesn't accord with Tim's ambition and he certainly used a rope to top out. Micky bottled it and traversed off left. Are there any more takers?

Funny. I don't seem to remember such scrutiny of Micky when he climbed the rock and the footage then appeared captioned as The Young 8A+ in a commercial film. Or when Dan did it and pulled on a rope to top out.
http://beastmakerblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 26, 2019, 11:09:05 pm
Really good points Will, and possibly related to who seems ‘in vogue’ and desirable to identify with rather than recognise the facts. Another recent example off this is the climbing on ‘wet grit’ scenario where some v diff plodders were demonised along with the bmc for promoting this yet Pete and Toms rainy day Staffordshire nose appeared to be applauded as an outrageous success.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 26, 2019, 11:24:33 pm
At this rate I expect we'll find out that Andy dabbed on the first move and the first ascent will be up for grabs.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Andy W on March 27, 2019, 06:50:29 am
It’s a bit like doing a crouch start rather than a sit start.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: turnipturned on March 27, 2019, 08:23:49 am
This looks amazing, been on the list for ages. I heard it’s hard to find? How far is the walk in? Does it need a long time to dry out?

Sorry not read the thread at all, just saw the title, and how many pages it’s got to, so my blind guess is, Franco kinda did the young, but placed a tricam half way, pulled on it, then stood on it, claimed it was logical method, gave it H8.5, wrote some meandering weird blog post, sent it to UKC and then claimed it not as good as his half fallen down cliff in North York’s moors? Am I correct?

I like him, he is entertaining, good on you for whatever you did, bet you had a good time, that’s what’s it’s about right?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Ru on March 27, 2019, 08:59:59 am
Am I correct?

Pretty much.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: abarro81 on March 27, 2019, 09:38:02 am
Devils advocate here, do you think maybe it’s because alongside the very honest description of what he did there is a blog post titled with a route name that he didn’t do and an awful lot of description about the legendary status of a route that he didn’t do? And a name and a grade written in the Instagram post, again of a route he didn’t climb?

It just seems odd to publiscise something he describes as personally meaningful in that way, when you haven’t done the legendary route in question.

Quite.
Just give it a different name and grade, or if you think it's the same grade then give it a different name and the same grade. It's clearly not "The Young". Now that might mean that The Young is a crappy eliminate and this is "the line"... it would be disappointing for a classic to turn out to be elim/escapable but it wouldn't be the first time. The deal with the crack being accessible from the rest doesn't imply that climbing the crack is the same thing... otherwise everyone who did La Reina Mora would get to tick La Rambla at the same time.. or everyone who's done Chimes gets to tick Devo too.. etc.. plenty of different routes share starts/finishes, but are just that - different routes. It's hard for me to see where any confusion about this arises, so I can only assume that Franco wanted some attention/discussion/to piss people off/couldn't think of a good pun to use as a new name
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: SA Chris on March 27, 2019, 09:59:39 am
Franco, just call it an FA and call it a day. The Foung 7C, 3 stars.

If the start to the other problem does fall apart then your line becomes the star attraction :smartass:

The Dung?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Smith42 on March 27, 2019, 11:49:42 am
Franco, great effort to do the top out without prior inspection. 
I think what has got some peoples backs up is that the title is the ‘ground up ascent of The Young’.  What Franco has climbed is a variation start to the Young. 
The true ground up ascent of the Young still awaits, but this ascent has MASSIVELY broken down that psychological barrier that the top section can be climbed ground up. 
The only other known (?) ground up was by Mikey Page and he avoided the top section off left and then the video title was the Young 8A+ so lets cut Franco a little slack on this one eh?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: petejh on March 27, 2019, 12:11:36 pm
Franco, just call it an FA and call it a day. The Foung 7C, 3 stars.

If the start to the other problem does fall apart then your line becomes the star attraction :smartass:

The Dung?

Franco attention-seeking.. Could call it 'The Same Old'.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: SA Chris on March 27, 2019, 12:32:55 pm
the title is the ground up ascent of 'The Young’. 

To be fair I don't think Franco wrote that. maybe the ' ' either side would make it more appropriate.

Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: 36chambers on March 27, 2019, 12:48:32 pm
Franco, just call it an FA and call it a day. The Foung 7C, 3 stars.

If the start to the other problem does fall apart then your line becomes the star attraction :smartass:

The Dung?

There's also the obvious LGP link-up of The Dung into "Micky's Cop-out" for any keen first ascensionist
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: kelvin on March 27, 2019, 01:35:00 pm


There's also the obvious LGP link-up of The Dung into "Micky's Cop-out" for any keen first ascensionist

The Easy Way Up.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: ferret on March 27, 2019, 02:55:13 pm
Don't forget boulder problem start then top out the crack. Could be the new Pillbox.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: gme on March 27, 2019, 03:38:02 pm
I've lost track of who has been up this bit of rock now. Is it fair to say that, in fact, nobody has repeated Earl's The Young? Dan used a different sequence on the crux which doesn't accord with Tim's ambition and he certainly used a rope to top out. Micky bottled it and traversed off left. Are there any more takers?

Funny. I don't seem to remember such scrutiny of Micky when he climbed the rock and the footage then appeared captioned as The Young 8A+ in a commercial film. Or when Dan did it and pulled on a rope to top out.
http://beastmakerblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/

Dan did do the exact route that andy did using the same holds but, like the classic Eric morecambe joke “not  necessarily in the correct order.”  No idea where the idea you had to finish directly came from as the guidebook clearly states move back right until standing on the jug. I told Franco the sequence to do this which I guess is the way he did it.
Reading the description Dan only used a rope to get up the bank at the top of the route after he had got the finish jug, and it is a jug.
Neds and Micky’s sequence and I suspect the way Franco does it,  is identical to Andy’s other than they now put the heel into the jug for the cross over which makes the move much easier.

I think the only reason the film is out there is nic got a load of footage whilst filming for life on hold and didn’t want to use it in the film as , like Franco, they didn’t do the route. Seems a waste to not use it so he does a quick edit and bungs it up to entertain us all.

The young is an absolutely amazing route with some of the best holds and climbing on anything I have ever tried. It would stand proud in the middle of font. 

Franco has found out it, like many routes, is escapeable but I can assure you the way he chose to do it is not the route nor is it the most logical line either in the eyes of a route climber or boulderer, and his approach has turned what could have been one of the most impressive ascents in the country into a farce.



Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Ged on March 28, 2019, 01:05:30 pm
Devils advocate here, do you think maybe it’s because alongside the very honest description of what he did there is a blog post titled with a route name that he didn’t do and an awful lot of description about the legendary status of a route that he didn’t do? And a name and a grade written in the Instagram post, again of a route he didn’t climb?

It just seems odd to publiscise something he describes as personally meaningful in that way, when you haven’t done the legendary route in question.

Quite.
Just give it a different name and grade, or if you think it's the same grade then give it a different name and the same grade.

Or, and call me crazy here, don't blag about it on the internet and write to UKC reporting what you've done.  That would seemingly solve the issue.  Also probably explains why Mickey didn't get any stick for finishing out left.  I don't recall him writing to UKC to tell everyone about his weekend.

 I couldn't particularly give a monkeys how people do routes, or variations.  But if you're going to publicize yourself in this way, you need to be prepared to be open to criticism.  It's not like it's just a blog post.  Franco has actively chosen to seek attention for this.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 28, 2019, 01:31:01 pm
I can’t imagine the headmaster or his deputies could give a monkeys either or possibly even Franco, and definitely not the thousands of climbers who will be reading about it outside of ukb. Radically authentic or full of insta bullshit who knows?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on March 28, 2019, 01:40:47 pm
I was kind of behind Franco on this way one, as it seemed to be he'd never actually claimed to have done The Young. But having it written up on UKC as a news story, claiming to have climbed a new variant, is ridiculous (missing some of the original climbing by climbing an easier adjacent route is not a variant). How much Franco had to do with the UKC story is another issue though. The article begins "Speaking to UKC, Franco said ... " but then just verbatim quotes the blog with a couple of linking sentences added here and there. As a piece of journalism it isn't a piece of journalism.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Ged on March 28, 2019, 01:47:57 pm
There's a reply from one of the UKC people saying that Franco wrote to them with the report, then published it on his blog afterwards. 
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: webbo on March 28, 2019, 03:19:28 pm
Will posted first about Franco’s ascent, it would appear he was unaware of what had gone on about the start. As he was staying at Franco’s one might assume that the bit about the start someone didn’t get mentioned at first.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: carlisle slapper on March 28, 2019, 09:15:40 pm
This is brilliant, here we were all ready to doff caps after Franco manages to climb something hard in good style and it turns out he just had to be Franco.

only Franco goes to ground up the young, calls it eliminate, fragile and escapable and climbs up a VS over a metre to the right which takes bomber gear and would essentially render the upper part like being next to a bolt with those cams you could place, like soloing an e5 7a. claims to still be just as bold by not placing the gear, which is a really good effort but also pointless as if you've climbed a bloody VS crack to access the upper part and are by all accounts a trad climber. The top holds were clearly cleaned and chalked but i've seen no mention of that. especially if i'd have seen anyone on that bit. Also you can traverse into those moves from the crack if you like, with gear even higher.

As ever it feels like Franco has twisted things to suit him and make up for a lack of ability but loads of boldness. This is a great effort breaking down a new highball font 7B+ link up ground up with a high crux and a logical way to do it, just don't try and sell knowledgable ukb people a word salad of it being remotely as hard as Andy's 2001 route. climbing through the bottom wont wear it out but lapping a 7B/+ does tire anyone out and makes working the upper section harder. in essence whilst being totally logical to traverse in from an effort point of view its killed any cachet of ground upping the young if thats the way its going to play out as you may as well just whack some cams in and sort the top then do the whole thing once you've got it wired. Save the knees for the highball lines where you cant escape in or out next to bomber gear (there's one 20m away)

Will i'm not overly chuffed watching you flippantly reduce mine and Mickys efforts because you wrote a misleading description. On the day i did the young (i'd ground upped to the dinner plates on my first session before) i abbed it once, only checked the upper part once (exactly the same way andy went, 7A/+ as a highball grade) then did it first try from the ground. The main reason for the rope at the top was that Marks light stand was tied off in the line of the exit with huge tree root handles, so i agreed to just pull through the wet bilberrys on the left using the rope. it didn't seem worth scalping the top of the boulder or forcing mark to change what he was doing as essentially i was on top of the crag already. other than sea cliff trad this is the only instance where i've use a rope to pull through vegetation. I had 3 pads but no spotters to move them, had Mark not been there i wouldn't have gone for it so it was a compromise to make it work, nor did i look to keep it quiet that i'd used one. I hardly "topped out with it" and using the same holds in a different order is fine everywhere except pinches wall and minus ten. Cheers though

Micky and Ned's problem out left isn't exactly just "traversing" off either, nor did they even bother writing it up. its not a break and there are tricky unprotectable moves to go leftwards, they just don't gain as much height. It is an independent finish as it takes you away from the crack. If it wasnt for their better beta in the middle being on film i'd say that would've taken much more working out too. at 7Cish its a logical line and one with no gear options. again all this was 8/9 years ago and there have been a lot of hard highball GU ascents of other lines since, up to font 8B.


Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Fiend on March 28, 2019, 09:23:31 pm
The HVS crack is pretty good to be fair....
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 28, 2019, 09:28:14 pm
Where do you stand on this response on ukc Dan? The idea that any of this is ‘disrespectful’ made me chuckle. Strange times.

UKC reply-
“This view that we should only report on black and white ascents is a strange one. If this was all that climbing was, it would be very dull.  Also, to give Andy Earl ownership over that bit of rock and to criticise anyone who veers away from what he did is slightly disrespectful. Andy undoubtedly climbed the line of the crag, but to write off what Ned Feehally and Micky Page climbed would be unfair because it was a similarly impressive bit of climbing, done in one session, at great height. More than anything it contextualises Andy’s superb first ascent; two world-class boulderers weren’t able to climb the direct line in a session, but added a logical addition which takes a different line of weakness.

Likewise, to simply dismiss Franco's efforts and call foul because he didn't tow the party line ignores the fact that he did some hard climbing, well above the deck and ground-up. Whilst previous ascensionists have climbed a harder sequence, they've known the moves and been able to practise them. I’m sure people will go back soon and push the style of ascent forward once again. The non-linear lines and story of this bit of rock are what makes climbing so interesting and enjoyable.

Anyone who has met Franco also knows how absurd the idea is that he has masterminded all this for publicity. He has been nothing but clear and honest in the way he has described what he climbed. He has also expressed his satisfaction with what he climbed, which is the aim of any climber. Not only has it stirred up and interesting debate, but it also adds to Northumberland’s rich tapestry of climbing history. Life really would be boring if success (in a conventional manner) was all that mattered.“
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: C Coldwell-Storry on March 28, 2019, 09:56:36 pm
I'm gunna walk in. Do this ground up in a couple of goes...take a shit at the bottom and then fuck off.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: turnipturned on March 28, 2019, 09:59:12 pm
I'm gunna walk in. Do this ground up in a couple of goes...take a shit at the bottom and then fuck off.

Won’t be the first time!!
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 28, 2019, 10:01:56 pm
I'm gunna walk in. Do this ground up in a couple of goes...take a shit at the bottom and then fuck off.

Don’t forget your wooden pallets and 10 mats 😂

https://youtu.be/Z_PoJ3GKjNg
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: reeve on March 28, 2019, 10:08:33 pm
I'm gunna walk in. Do this ground up in a couple of goes...take a shit at the bottom and then fuck off.

Tell me when you're heading there, I'll smash into your car for the full experience
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 28, 2019, 10:34:17 pm
Maybe you could slip him some imodium at the same time Reeve. Ukc could make a follow up film:

‘Bowels on hold’
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on March 28, 2019, 10:35:29 pm
This has turned out to be complete bullshit.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 28, 2019, 11:03:45 pm
Which bit? It was just getting interesting.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on March 28, 2019, 11:18:11 pm
Franco's bit. If we're being brutally honest, this was nothing but a failed attempt at something. No shame in that, we all fail sometimes and failing can sometimes provide some of the most memorable and powerful experiences. We can learn from failing and failing can even be intensely satisfying. No doubt this was a very fine effort from Franco - a noble failure if you like - but then he wrote to UKC to spin his failure to climb The Young as a new variant worthy of a news story. That is the bullshit part. If doing the top ground up was such a satisfying experience then why did it need this embellishment?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Andy F on March 28, 2019, 11:45:43 pm
So, in summary,

Franco could do the bottom but not then the top.

He skipped the bottom and did the top.

This is now big news.

Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on March 29, 2019, 02:13:16 am
Where do you stand on this response on ukc Dan? The idea that any of this is ‘disrespectful’ made me chuckle. Strange times.

UKC reply-
“This view that we should only report on black and white ascents is a strange one. If this was all that climbing was, it would be very dull.  Also, to give Andy Earl ownership over that bit of rock and to criticise anyone who veers away from what he did is slightly disrespectful. Andy undoubtedly climbed the line of the crag, but to write off what Ned Feehally and Micky Page climbed would be unfair because it was a similarly impressive bit of climbing, done in one session, at great height. More than anything it contextualises Andy’s superb first ascent; two world-class boulderers weren’t able to climb the direct line in a session, but added a logical addition which takes a different line of weakness.

Likewise, to simply dismiss Franco's efforts and call foul because he didn't tow the party line ignores the fact that he did some hard climbing, well above the deck and ground-up. Whilst previous ascensionists have climbed a harder sequence, they've known the moves and been able to practise them. I’m sure people will go back soon and push the style of ascent forward once again. The non-linear lines and story of this bit of rock are what makes climbing so interesting and enjoyable.

Anyone who has met Franco also knows how absurd the idea is that he has masterminded all this for publicity. He has been nothing but clear and honest in the way he has described what he climbed. He has also expressed his satisfaction with what he climbed, which is the aim of any climber. Not only has it stirred up and interesting debate, but it also adds to Northumberland’s rich tapestry of climbing history. Life really would be boring if success (in a conventional manner) was all that mattered.“

Seems pretty measured and appropriate to me. Certainly reads that way.

I found it hard reading some of the above (in this thread) which came across as a lot of projection as to his motivations - and overly damning.

This reads as someone being enticed by the bold upper line, and being open about their approach and actions.

I think it's great when people share what they're enthused by, without it having to be seen as attention seeking.

It does sound as though mistakes have been made in how it was reported, but to imply some ulterior motive seems a judgement too far.

There have been a number of higher profile protagonists, who've tried to explore the boundaries of the sport, who've then been ripped apart in the forums, and this seems to be more of the same.

That's not the same thing as saying don't criticise or question, which in this case perhaps just needed to be restricted to the question of "How do we report this ascent?".

Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: moose on March 29, 2019, 07:02:38 am
Where do you stand on this response on ukc Dan? The idea that any of this is ‘disrespectful’ made me chuckle. Strange times.
UKC reply-
Likewise, to simply dismiss Franco's efforts and call foul because he didn't tow the party line....

Well, at least one good thing has come from this; UKC get to contribute an "eggcorn".
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Doylo on March 29, 2019, 08:38:20 am
Doesn’t need a news item on a national climbing website though does it Dave.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: carlisle slapper on March 29, 2019, 08:43:55 am
To be fair, Ned myself and Dolph are all guilty of pissing around doing link ups on one of the countries best problems (careless) it was just after we'd all ground upped it and we didn't seek to write them up. it definitely sullies the line a bit though when this happens.

I've also bouldered many lines which have gear so i understand its just a way of climbing and setting the exposure level. Nowadays i'd have used the gear on this link but when i was 18 probably not (e.g on Earthboots at rivelin).

Committing to the top is a great effort, not just a massive helmet but the spuds to back it up. the people posting who i know have been up there all say so as they know it involves a really focussed few moves.

This surely has to open the door to more people climbing the young ground up. As if the gear is used it's not going to be worlds different than a TR, 7B/+ GU has been with us since the early 80's in the county (Kremlin) lest we forget. Fair play to franco for not using the gear for the sake of style but its so obviously there it'll be worth it for many and the main weirdness with its height is that it's justifiable as a boulder or a short route depending on approach. It's the youngs fault for being enterable/escapable at the jug and the top pinch, poor setting if you ask me, should've left the jug off. Until now we've all ignored the VS in the room in favour of that impeccable wall.

Hopefully the fact that this is still a good effort comes through, its just weird as you can feel the audience clamouring for the whole show so they can clap.

In a shit week of proper news this and the new Alan Partridge have been just the ticket.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Ged on March 29, 2019, 09:10:25 am
Franco's bit. If we're being brutally honest, this was nothing but a failed attempt at something. No shame in that, we all fail sometimes and failing can sometimes provide some of the most memorable and powerful experiences. We can learn from failing and failing can even be intensely satisfying. No doubt this was a very fine effort from Franco - a noble failure if you like - but then he wrote to UKC to spin his failure to climb The Young as a new variant worthy of a news story. That is the bullshit part. If doing the top ground up was such a satisfying experience then why did it need this embellishment?

Well put Andy. That's the whole thing that leaves a bitter taste for me.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on March 29, 2019, 12:40:03 pm
Franco's bit. If we're being brutally honest, this was nothing but a failed attempt at something. No shame in that, we all fail sometimes and failing can sometimes provide some of the most memorable and powerful experiences. We can learn from failing and failing can even be intensely satisfying. No doubt this was a very fine effort from Franco - a noble failure if you like - but then he wrote to UKC to spin his failure to climb The Young as a new variant worthy of a news story. That is the bullshit part. If doing the top ground up was such a satisfying experience then why did it need this embellishment?

It's a fair summary but it does rely entirely on the premise that posting on UKC is significantly different to posting on Instagram or your own blog, and likewise that making a 'news' item on UKC has any real significance. I think the differences are a lot smaller than it was in the days of print media, and will continue to diminish. It's a distinction I'm struggling to get exercised over to be honest, if the height of controversy nowadays is 'ooh the fucker posted on the wrong website' I'll gladly take it over the did he/ didn't he of the past.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Bradders on March 29, 2019, 02:12:57 pm
did he/ didn't he

No video. Maybe he didn't even do what he's claimed...!

 :worms: :worms: :worms:
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Somebody's Fool on March 29, 2019, 02:59:20 pm
Franco's bit. If we're being brutally honest, this was nothing but a failed attempt at something. No shame in that, we all fail sometimes and failing can sometimes provide some of the most memorable and powerful experiences. We can learn from failing and failing can even be intensely satisfying. No doubt this was a very fine effort from Franco - a noble failure if you like - but then he wrote to UKC to spin his failure to climb The Young as a new variant worthy of a news story. That is the bullshit part. If doing the top ground up was such a satisfying experience then why did it need this embellishment?

It's a fair summary but it does rely entirely on the premise that posting on UKC is significantly different to posting on Instagram or your own blog, and likewise that making a 'news' item on UKC has any real significance. I think the differences are a lot smaller than it was in the days of print media, and will continue to diminish. It's a distinction I'm struggling to get exercised over to be honest, if the height of controversy nowadays is 'ooh the fucker posted on the wrong website' I'll gladly take it over the did he/ didn't he of the past.

Isn't the point of modern journalism to report something in a contentious or highly polarised manner, and then open the comments section?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on March 29, 2019, 06:49:32 pm
Franco's bit. If we're being brutally honest, this was nothing but a failed attempt at something. No shame in that, we all fail sometimes and failing can sometimes provide some of the most memorable and powerful experiences. We can learn from failing and failing can even be intensely satisfying. No doubt this was a very fine effort from Franco - a noble failure if you like - but then he wrote to UKC to spin his failure to climb The Young as a new variant worthy of a news story. That is the bullshit part. If doing the top ground up was such a satisfying experience then why did it need this embellishment?

It's a fair summary but it does rely entirely on the premise that posting on UKC is significantly different to posting on Instagram or your own blog, and likewise that making a 'news' item on UKC has any real significance. I think the differences are a lot smaller than it was in the days of print media, and will continue to diminish. It's a distinction I'm struggling to get exercised over to be honest, if the height of controversy nowadays is 'ooh the fucker posted on the wrong website' I'll gladly take it over the did he/ didn't he of the past.

I get what you mean, but its much more the framing than the outlet. It could have been an interesting feature article about trying something, not quite doing it, but still finding it really rewarding. But its specifically presented as news, that's the issue, as far as I'm concerned. I also suspect that for a lot of UKC readers the site is very significantly different from Instagram.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 29, 2019, 08:16:05 pm
This is brilliant, here we were all ready to doff caps after Franco manages to climb something hard in good style and it turns out he just had to be Franco.

only Franco goes to ground up the young, calls it eliminate, fragile and escapable and climbs up a VS over a metre to the right which takes bomber gear and would essentially render the upper part like being next to a bolt with those cams you could place, like soloing an e5 7a. claims to still be just as bold by not placing the gear, which is a really good effort but also pointless as if you've climbed a bloody VS crack to access the upper part and are by all accounts a trad climber. The top holds were clearly cleaned and chalked but i've seen no mention of that. especially if i'd have seen anyone on that bit. Also you can traverse into those moves from the crack if you like, with gear even higher.

As ever it feels like Franco has twisted things to suit him and make up for a lack of ability but loads of boldness. This is a great effort breaking down a new highball font 7B+ link up ground up with a high crux and a logical way to do it, just don't try and sell knowledgable ukb people a word salad of it being remotely as hard as Andy's 2001 route. climbing through the bottom wont wear it out but lapping a 7B/+ does tire anyone out and makes working the upper section harder. in essence whilst being totally logical to traverse in from an effort point of view its killed any cachet of ground upping the young if thats the way its going to play out as you may as well just whack some cams in and sort the top then do the whole thing once you've got it wired. Save the knees for the highball lines where you cant escape in or out next to bomber gear (there's one 20m away)

Will i'm not overly chuffed watching you flippantly reduce mine and Mickys efforts because you wrote a misleading description. On the day i did the young (i'd ground upped to the dinner plates on my first session before) i abbed it once, only checked the upper part once (exactly the same way andy went, 7A/+ as a highball grade) then did it first try from the ground. The main reason for the rope at the top was that Marks light stand was tied off in the line of the exit with huge tree root handles, so i agreed to just pull through the wet bilberrys on the left using the rope. it didn't seem worth scalping the top of the boulder or forcing mark to change what he was doing as essentially i was on top of the crag already. other than sea cliff trad this is the only instance where i've use a rope to pull through vegetation. I had 3 pads but no spotters to move them, had Mark not been there i wouldn't have gone for it so it was a compromise to make it work, nor did i look to keep it quiet that i'd used one. I hardly "topped out with it" and using the same holds in a different order is fine everywhere except pinches wall and minus ten. Cheers though

Micky and Ned's problem out left isn't exactly just "traversing" off either, nor did they even bother writing it up. its not a break and there are tricky unprotectable moves to go leftwards, they just don't gain as much height. It is an independent finish as it takes you away from the crack. If it wasnt for their better beta in the middle being on film i'd say that would've taken much more working out too. at 7Cish its a logical line and one with no gear options. again all this was 8/9 years ago and there have been a lot of hard highball GU ascents of other lines since, up to font 8B.

Dan, I guess you know this, but my post wasn't really trying to belittle yours or anyone's efforts, because why would I? You went and did some climbing, didn't chip or damage the crag or the rock, and you were honest about what you did. So all's well.

The post was trying to illustrate the point that people are much more prepared to call out Franco than others. If people had wanted to call you out for a bit of a rope tug going over the top on wet holds they could have done. Or said "back around" or whatever.

I've never climbed with Franco but one of my good chums, Dave, is one of his bezzie mates. Dave isn't strong, but he's good. He approaches climbs with a stoic boldness, plodding ever upwards. If he gets to a move he finds difficult he just hangs on for long enough that the holds in front of him become bigger by natural erosion, then he plods through. I respect his climbing a lot. He always describes Franco as a really good climber in ONE style - weird, crimpy, bold wall climbing. Incidentally this type of climbing is hideously unfashionable. He doesn't seem to like bouldering much and he didn't seem to do a lot of sport. And he's done most of his climbing in relative backwaters which seems to irk people. It's a shame because he's an interesting climber with a lot of personality. Stacks more personality and far more remarkable in his chosen discipline than lots of people who get free shoes nowadays.

Obviously he's not done The Young. I'd like to see him go back and do it.

As to UKC's reporting of it, they'll print literally anything. The fact that they just published what was sent to them with no further questions or insight shows you as much.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: webbo on March 29, 2019, 08:33:39 pm
Will
As you seem to have been at Franco’s on the evening when he’d been at Cally what did he say he’d done.
As you were the one who reported he’d done The Young on here.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 29, 2019, 11:59:46 pm
I hadn't met Franco before last weekend. We used to antagonise each other a bit on UKC when we were teenagers. I had a couple of free days and Dave said that Franco would put me up, which he did at short notice. Dave mentioned that he was trying The Young ground up. All I knew about this was that Gav had said on here that it would be significant.
Russell and Si came round in the morning and we talked about Brexit. Dave and I went to Callerhues and got back to Franco's after dark. Dave had had a text from Franco saying he'd had success. We said well done and then I chatted on a lot about how great Callerhues was and all the routes we'd done that day and that we'd climbed something easy and obvious and decent and it transpired to be unrecorded. Not a great deal more was said. We had dinner where Dave and I reminisced about uni friends and then I drove home.

So, sorry to disappoint, Steve. Nobody has lied, but I had an idea in mind about what Franco had done and we didn't talk about it in sufficient depth to get the detail.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: ali k on March 30, 2019, 06:59:21 am
What did you have for dinner?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Doylo on March 30, 2019, 08:00:24 am
What’s he ever done at Pot Hole Quarry anyway?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: webbo on March 30, 2019, 08:19:31 am
You don’t have to be sorry Will. I was just trying to understand how something done for someone’s own satisfaction had become national climbing news.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on March 30, 2019, 08:27:29 am
What did you have for dinner?

I skipped the starter but the main was nice.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: webbo on March 30, 2019, 08:35:35 am
What did you have for dinner?

I skipped the starter but the main was nice.
I hope Broccoli was involved somewhere.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Oldmanmatt on March 30, 2019, 08:59:56 am
What did you have for dinner?

I skipped the starter but the main was nice.

I see you are avoiding the dessert issue.

You had two desserts didn’t you?!

And I bet you finished the cream, too...
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: tomtom on March 30, 2019, 11:14:30 am
What did you have for dinner?

I skipped the starter but the main was nice.

I see you are avoiding the dessert issue.

You had two desserts didn’t you?!

And I bet you finished the cream, too...

😱 two deserts and you’re tall!
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: mrjonathanr on March 30, 2019, 11:51:46 am
You don’t have to be sorry Will. I was just trying to understand how something done for someone’s own satisfaction had become national climbing news.

It hasn’t really- has it?? Someone has sprayed about an ascent so it sounds more impressive/newsworthy than it really is. Not that unusual on ukc I shouldn’t have thought.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on March 30, 2019, 01:25:31 pm
Good post by Will above.

 :thumbsup:

How about referring to Franco's ascent as The Jung?  ;)
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Franco on March 30, 2019, 09:54:54 pm
I don't think there's a lot more to add to this, but I do want to make it clear that I have nothing but respect for Andy's routes. I've already talked about what I see as the County Trilogy. The Young may be escapable at two points, but the climbing is utterly superb. I'm sure it will continue to be a coveted tick, despite the evident issues that the 2/3 people who have tried it ground up have found.  The Dark Side is one of the best anywhere and the Prow looks equally amazing. So this was in no way a pop at Andy, just trying to add an honest assessment of the route's merits and potential problems.

I've messed up the way I've justified the crack start. I'm not saying it's the line of weakness. I think the line in its entirety is worth while, just that I wasn't particularly bothered about doing it each time. I've re-read some of the stuff I wrote and it does sound like I'm advocating leaving the start altogether. I was interested in bouldering all the moves, but the unknown for me on this route was whether the hardish moves at the top could be worked out ground up. I was buzzing my nut off when I did it, which is probably why I made such a hash of writing it up. Maybe the lack of effort in doing the start each time comes across as a lack of respect for the route. I'm trying to learn how to climb on county sandstone better these days and my general rule is, if it feels wrong, stop. It felt wrong doing the start so many times. 

I do still maintain that the start adds very little to the overall difficulty of the climb, even with pretty mediocre sport fitness. From the initial reporting, I did always say it added a little bit, but not sport grades of difference to the challenge. People have been talking as if the bottom boulder problem is the crux of the climb, which is miles from the reality. It's fine once you know what you're doing and quite unphysical.

People have also said I overstated the rests. I described the points in between the three boulder problems as "shake-outs" on my blog and agree the top one isn't great (just swapping hands and chalking), but the one after this first boulder problem is good. I didn't spend long there on the video because the bottom boulder problem really doesn't tire you out. You're mostly just waiting for the feeling in your fingers to come back. 

As for the reporting, I mentioned it to Nick when chatting about something else and even caveatted it with "possibly worth deciding whether you are happy to carry that level of nonsense controversy before I send you owt". I have to say, despite having said that, I'm quite surprised by the level of criticism on this. If I'm totally honest, I felt like I'd done The Young. Obviously it was a bit of a weird ascent, but given the strange line of the route, I thought it was a decent and pragmatic way of doing it. I kind of expected people who had been on the climb to back me up on this, but I see that hasn't really happened - so maybe I've been a bit naive there. I think The Young is a climb that holds a very special place in a lot of people's hearts and so me saying all this, once again, potentially looks like a lack of respect.

So to sum up, maybe I'm wrong to feel like I've taken on the main challenge of that wall. Maybe I'm wrong about the line. Maybe I shouldn't have shared my experience. I think climbing is best when people go and do interesting things in new ways and our default position is to assume that most other climbers are decent people.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: user deactivated on March 30, 2019, 10:48:42 pm
A lot of subtext in there. After reading the thread about it on ukclimbing, I’d probably just forget all about it and go ‘climbing’ instead. There’s certainly very little joy and a lot of self seriousness. The idea that anyone can be disrespected by climbing a bit of rock is bizarre. I’m currently surfing a bizarre urge to disrespect the gaggle of self important bellends going on about respect 😂
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Andy F on March 30, 2019, 10:59:03 pm
Franco,

We haven't often (never) seen eye to eye. I completely respect your climbing. In many ways it's old school. Ground up. Little pre practice. To be admired in the instaspamfaceache age.

But ffs stop justifying your achievements. Just enjoy them. With your mates. In the pub.

Old school style.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: shurt on March 31, 2019, 10:38:15 am
Bob Marley said 'you can't please all the people all the time'. This is more true on the internet than in normal life so fuck it.
Franco, maybe stop reading the internet for a while and as Andy said enjoy what you've just done...
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on March 31, 2019, 02:40:11 pm
Good account by Franco above, in my opinion, and exactly how I'd read it.

I think that  we approach climbing is as news worthy as the end product - if not more so.

 :clap2:
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: SA Chris on April 08, 2019, 09:27:10 am
Indeed. And if the bottom is indeed that straighforward, surely the best thing to do is to just go back and make good?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Sasquatch on April 08, 2019, 05:42:27 pm
So if he goes back and does it, does it still count as "ground up"?   :worms: :worms:
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: SA Chris on April 08, 2019, 05:59:37 pm
I would say yes
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on April 08, 2019, 06:06:58 pm
Yes, definitely.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: monkoffunk on April 08, 2019, 06:18:04 pm
I would say definitely not.


I also don’t think he ‘should’ do anything.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on April 08, 2019, 06:44:58 pm
I would say definitely not.

Actually, on reflection, you're probably right.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Snoops on April 09, 2019, 08:50:52 am
Indeed. And if the bottom is indeed that straighforward, surely the best thing to do is to just go back and make good?

That is the crux of the issue.
He should either of done what he's done and privately enjoyed it.

Or if he'd wanted to shout about something...waited til he was strong enough to go bottom to top.

Simple really
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: ferret on April 09, 2019, 08:55:36 am
So if he goes back and does it, does it still count as "ground up"?   :worms: :worms:
No, but it would still be bloody impressive
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 09, 2019, 09:24:52 am
My ground-up ethic has always been that anything goes apart from artificial aid. So yeah I'd call that ground-up.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 09, 2019, 10:16:23 am
If that isn't ground up, which is the bit which is abbed or top-roped?  :-\
Surely if it is climbed from the bottom it's ground up no matter how many goes/days it involves?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: monkoffunk on April 09, 2019, 10:32:03 am
He will have ground up climbed a bit of rock, but if that is the goal then he is already done that so why bother doing it again?

He won’t have ground upped ‘the young’ because he has already climbed the top via an alternate route. He has already practiced those moves so he can’t do the route ground up.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: mrjonathanr on April 09, 2019, 10:39:35 am

He won’t have ground upped ‘the young’ because he has already climbed the top via an alternate route. He has already practiced those moves so he can’t do the route ground up.

Indulge me- I'm genuinely confused here.  Does it matter if he climbed part of the route previously? If the upper section was previously achieved ground up, it's still ground up now, surely? It's just ground up in a different order on different days.

That's a similar distinction to onsight vs flash, but it still retains the ethic of from the ground only. Or do you feel that ground up must be in the natural sequence from the ground on that day?


Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 09, 2019, 10:43:56 am
He won’t have ground upped ‘the young’ because he has already climbed the top via an alternate route. He has already practiced those moves so he can’t do the route ground up.

Nah.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: abarro81 on April 09, 2019, 11:14:10 am
I'm with monkoffunk on this one
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 09, 2019, 11:20:14 am
So presumably you think having onsighted/ ground-upped Great Western invalidates your subsequent onsight/ ground-up of Western Front?

Nah.

Either you are 'practicing' - i.e. using aid to get on moves you couldn't climb to - or you're climbing. To suggest otherwise is to push the idea where you may not follow the logical progression of difficulty on a buttress or invalidate your subsequent ascents. Which is bullshit.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: SA Chris on April 09, 2019, 11:23:57 am
I'm with JB on this one.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: reeve on April 09, 2019, 11:38:05 am
To my mind, although an ascent from the ground would now be ground up in an aesthetic sense, but it would not be in a performance sense.

To elaborate, hypothetically imagine two routes of the same grade, with independent starts and finishes but a shared crux sequence in the middle. For the purpose of this example, both starts and finishes are much easier than the crux bit in the middle. So, I set off on route A, but fall off the crux. Having tried it once, I have now realised my mistake and know what I should have done. Having spent my youth reading High magazine, I know that onsighting is the only thing that really counts, so I don't bother trying it again. Instead, I'll try route B, but of course knowing what to do at the crux makes it easy, so I "on sight" it. But of course it isn't an onsight ascent, even though there was no pre-practice or abseiling involved.

If you call Franco's possible future ascent of The Young ground up, you fail to take into account the advantage he will have gained by practicing the top from the adjacent route. I remember trying a highball / mini-route (on the NYMs as it happens), but I didn't dare do the pop to the jug at the top as I wasn't sure if I could reach it, so I kept down climbing. After repeatedly failing to commit, I climbed an adjacent VS and hand traversed to the finishing jug, dangled my feet down to check I could stretch from the good footholds to the jug - which I could - then did it from the bottom the next go. Sure, I didn't top rope it or ab, but it's clearly a tainted ascent from a ground-up perspective, because it was pretty straight forward with my shenanigans, yet beyond my ability / boldness without them. Calling my effort "ground-up" would put it on a par with someone who followed the line without messing around on a VS, which it clearly wasn't.

For the avoidance of doubt, all of this is meant to serve a purpose of denigrating his ascent and attempts at gaining public notoriety (not really Franco  :) )
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 09, 2019, 11:45:59 am
The point of 'ground-up' to me is it embraces all this with the sole proviso that you start at the ground. Your example would invalidate an onsight - as you say - but not a ground-up. That's the point of the category.

Yes, going without would be better. If you think that should be a different category, what about traversing off - like Mickey did - should it invalidate a subsequent ascent by 'practicing the start'? If so, what about falling off? On purpose?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: 36chambers on April 09, 2019, 11:52:01 am
If you're allowed to traverse in from an adjacent route, are you allowed to place gear in that route to make working the real line safer?

Assuming you lead the real line properly from the start afterwards (without the off-piste gear), can you still claim GU?
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 09, 2019, 12:00:57 pm
Going back to the Great Western/ Western Front example, I don't see why not. What would invalidate it is falling off Great Western then getting back on by top-roping up Western Front.

What Franco has done, whether intentionally or not, is create a new route/ variation on existing routes.

Ground-up has never been a standard to aspire to, it's what you default to after the onsight has failed. Done badly I think it's a fair argument that a swift headpoint might be better style, but (I'd argue) of a lesser challenge.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: andy popp on April 09, 2019, 12:19:40 pm
Having gone back and forth on this I think if Franco went back now and climbed The Young cleanly from the ground he could claim a ground up, even though when he first climbed the top section he gained it from easier climbing to the right.

Ground-up has never been a standard to aspire to, it's what you default to after the onsight has failed.

Whilst this is certainly true it also obscures the fact that GU can be a very fine second best. Some of my best and most satisfying efforts have been GU ascents.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on April 09, 2019, 12:22:37 pm
The Great Western/Western Front example doesn't really work because all the difficulty on Western Front is independent from Great Western.
My view of a pure ground up ascent is of climbing a route with no top-rope inspection or abseil inspection and you have to pull rope and strip gear in between gos. In reality, this is very rarely going to happen because stripping kit between attempts is a momumental faff. It's not quite yo-yoing but on some routes it'll make a huge difference to the ultimate difficulty if most of the gear isn't placed on the final push.

If I was in any position to set the rules then I would define very broad criteria for onsight/flash/ground-up/redpoint/headpoint and any frigs within those categories must simply be declared to anybody who might give a shit.

I remember JB getting irked because I said I'd done Flame Arete "ground-up" after abbing down it and making sure it was clean. This to me seemed like the sensible way to do it as things at Hawkcliffe will generally want a dusting down. Anybody who might care (nobody) about this stylistic frig can see exactly what I did in my logbook. Because I worked the moves off the ledge, then calling it ground-up with caveats seemed like the right thing.

Similarly, I ticked Grand Illusion as onsight despite having done GW and the 5 star finish multiple times before, because the climbing either side of the three moves that is Grand Illusion is 5a and GI is 6a.


Then of course, there are those who don't care and have no scruples. My favourite UKC logbook entry is dunnyg' (of this Parish) entry for WYSIWYG:

26/Aug/09
TR dnf
Got to the big jug, before it goes off left,puddle in it, pinged off. Good up until then.

30/May/12
Lead dog
Bolt to bolt to start. Got it wired. One tricky move! 3 lead attempts.

01/Jun/12
Lead (flash)
yay. felt like poo. clipsticked up, then lead it. Easy for 7b.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: reeve on April 09, 2019, 12:29:01 pm
Going back to the Great Western/ Western Front example, I don't see why not. What would invalidate it is falling off Great Western then getting back on by top-roping up Western Front.

That's a good counter-example and I intended to address it in my last post but forgot. I think it's different because the finish of Great Western isn't the crux of Western Front. The knowledge and familiarity you gain from doing Great Western isn't going to make a material difference to your onsight or GU of Western Front. But that's not the same with The Young, which (from my armchair understanding) is difficult to do GU because you've got to do a hard bit at the top and the hard bit at the top is at the top. Traversing-in to practice the top is a much easier proposition than having to work it out when tired and a bit stressed from having completed the starting boulder problem. [ah, I see now that Will beat me to it with this argument]
 
Quote
Ground-up has never been a standard to aspire to, it's what you default to after the onsight has failed. Done badly I think it's a fair argument that a swift headpoint might be better style, but (I'd argue) of a lesser challenge.

I slightly disagree, in that I think GU (as in, not resorting to top roping or inspection) can be a standard to aspire to, but I fully agree with your sentiment that there are a lot of grey areas and it's very difficult to compare across different situations. Having said that, I think that lumping the 'traversing-in then ground up' approach with the 'I only stayed on the line ground up' bundles together two very different approaches (one of which can be significantly harder than the other), to such a degree that the label of doing something GU becomes so broad that it loses meaning.

I'm not losing sleep over it however, because I think the same happens with other labels we use. It's like the difference between a flash with minimal knowledge (like knowing where the crux is and that there is a hidden rock 2 but you can't remember where you were told to look for it) versus a full spray down beta-fest and your mate racking the gear on your harness in order for you to place it. To give both of those ascents the same label is similarly too broad to be really helpful. Perhaps I'm getting round to saying that none of the terms for style of ascent can account for the whole range of devious tricks one might use, and this example goes to show that. The answer is probably to explain what you actually did. But personally I still wouldn't call traversing-in to practice the top first a ground up ascent.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Teaboy on April 09, 2019, 12:29:16 pm
If he goes back he will have improved in the style in which the route has previously been climbed. There will still be improvements to be made (proper ground up, on-sight, no chalk etc. etc.) but for me the most impressive but of any such ascent will always be commiting to those top moves not knowing what's up there and Franco has done that to a certain extent (no idea how much beta he had). Ethical improvements in how routes are climbed are often minor rather than a great leap forward and I think Franco has made a minor step forward, so fair play to him. The rest is just a semantics.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: reeve on April 09, 2019, 12:33:05 pm
If he goes back he will have improved in the style in which the route has previously been climbed. There will still be improvements to be made (on-sight, no chalk etc. etc.) but for me the most impressive but of any such ascent will always be commuting to those top moves not knowing what's up there and Franco has done that to a certain extent (no idea how much beta he had). Ethical improvements in how routes are climbed are often minor rather than a great leap forward and I think Franco has made a minor step forward, so fair play to him. The rest is just a semantics.

That's a great yet apt autocorrect right there
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: petejh on April 09, 2019, 01:03:02 pm
Ground up is an ironic label when the reality so often involves grinding down.

Ground Down from the Ground Up
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: monkoffunk on April 09, 2019, 01:03:29 pm
As Teaboy says the impressive thing had been done and it is a different proposition now.

Yes he will have improved his style if he goes back, pretty fundamentally as he will actually have done the route.



He won’t have ground upped ‘the young’ because he has already climbed the top via an alternate route. He has already practiced those moves so he can’t do the route ground up.

Indulge me- I'm genuinely confused here.  Does it matter if he climbed part of the route previously? If the upper section was previously achieved ground up, it's still ground up now, surely? It's just ground up in a different order on different days.

That's a similar distinction to onsight vs flash, but it still retains the ethic of from the ground only. Or do you feel that ground up must be in the natural sequence from the ground on that day?

I agree he will have climbed that bit of rock ground up for sure, but as I said he has already done this. Will he have done the young ground up? No, he will have done the top from a VS, not the ground. What if he abed down to that rest on the VS and went from there? Would basically be the same.

Yes it’s semantics but if we bother having a language about climbing we might as well be talking about actual routes and not just bits of rock. Otherwise I’ll just go and walk from underneath the route around the back to the top and claim it ground up.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Johnny Brown on April 09, 2019, 01:43:37 pm
Whilst this is certainly true it also obscures the fact that GU can be a very fine second best. Some of my best and most satisfying efforts have been GU ascents.

Yeah I agree, aspire wasn't the right word.

I think intent plays a big part in style and those who want a tick rather than aspire to an experience will sometimes subvert what we tend to feel the definitions should mean.

But overall I think it's worth trying to preserve the original, self-explanatory meanings of the terms. So onsight should mean primarily without prior knowledge, flash first go, ground-up means just that (yes even for you Will).
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: DAVETHOMAS90 on April 09, 2019, 04:34:17 pm
I would say definitely not.


I also don’t think he ‘should’ do anything.

Completely agree. Seems pretty obvious to me.

Still applaud the effort.

Edit: Quality thread this, isn't it? Some fantastic contributions from everyone.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Fiend on April 09, 2019, 08:51:33 pm
Franco-who?

I feel the most important part of this debate has been cruelly overlooked.... This particular work of style-of-ascent genius:

Then of course, there are those who don't care and have no scruples. My favourite UKC logbook entry is dunnyg' (of this Parish) entry for WYSIWYG:

26/Aug/09
TR dnf
Got to the big jug, before it goes off left,puddle in it, pinged off. Good up until then.

30/May/12
Lead dog
Bolt to bolt to start. Got it wired. One tricky move! 3 lead attempts.

01/Jun/12
Lead (flash)
yay. felt like poo. clipsticked up, then lead it. Easy for 7b.

I hope that's deliberate.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: Will Hunt on April 09, 2019, 11:17:30 pm
It's the "easy for 7b" bit at the end which gets me.
Title: Re: Franco's ground up ascent of The Young at Callaly
Post by: dunnyg on April 10, 2019, 06:09:04 am
I sent my report to ukc but it never got published. I never heard back from 5.10 or moon climbing either, in fact, if someone could give ben a nidge when they next see him I could do with a new bouldering pad.#climbingismypassion #blessed
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal