UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => bouldering => Topic started by: Fiend on November 11, 2019, 05:00:00 pm
-
:-\ ;) :P :whistle:
-
You've fucked this right up. Where's the pain au chocolat/I don't give a fuck option? Never was there a poll more in need of it.
-
This is not some frivolous mockery requiring spoof options and other such nonsense. This is a serious debate affecting the future of climbing in Yorkshire, and therefore the world :spank:
-
I know what I think.
-
😃
-
I have more faith in his downgrades than his assertion that he has performed the most poised and efficient ascent of red baron roof of all time
-
I have more faith in his downgrades than his assertion that he has performed the most poised and efficient ascent of red baron roof of all time of any video that I've seen of it
Ftfy, Tim.
-
Maybe you should do a video series of classic problems, say from 6B to 7C showing that If you follow the Will method. They are all actually piss easy.
I reckon it would be best seller, you could become the next Neil Gresham.
-
Will’s downgrading [will] hopefully bring Yorkshire inline with the rest of the country. Well done Will 👍🏻
-
Maybe you should do a video series of classic problems, say from 6B to 7C showing that If you follow the Will method. They are all actually piss easy.
I reckon it would be best seller, you could become the next Neil Gresham.
A fate worse than death!
-
I have more faith in his downgrades than his assertion that he has performed the most poised and efficient ascent of red baron roof of all time of any video that I've seen of it
Ftfy, Tim.
Was your ascent filmed Will so we can compare and contrast?
I appreciate that you take the time to comment on grades, and most of the time I am unsurprised at what you find easy. I’m sure this winter you’ll blow my mind by doing ZY in a session and calling it no more than 7b+ when climbed perfectly :lol:
-
I have more faith in his downgrades than his assertion that he has performed the most poised and efficient ascent of red baron roof of all time of any video that I've seen of it
Ftfy, Tim.
Was your ascent filmed Will so we can compare and contrast?
No film to look at. What I mean (sorry this is boring but you did ask) is that everybody who's put a video online does it with a cut loose (often more than one), and the bit where they're moving their hand up the arete is more laboured than it needs to be. I can do all that stuff in shorter links, but putting it all together like that made the end bit very hard as I was getting gassed. So when I did it I didn't cut loose (as in Bradders' viddy), but also figured out that instead of patting up the arete bit by bit, it was much easier to crimp the little nipples which are low on the RHS and do one explosive pull to plant the right hand high on the arete where it's quite decent. That leaves you with more in the tank to do the final scrunching of the feet onto the lip (harder for the tall! :ang:) and the arete match.
-
Remind me to ask you for your autograph next time I see you.
-
Is their room for it on your chalk bag next to Neil Gresham's signature?
-
So when I did it I didn't cut loose (as in Bradders' viddy)
If you say so :bow: ::)
-
So when I did it I didn't cut loose (as in Bradders' viddy)
If you say so :bow: ::)
What I mean is that you do it without the cut loose. If you look at Stubbs and Callum C then they cut loose loads which obviously makes it loads harder. But they still did it cos they're beasts.
This thread should really be locked and logged now. Utter shite. Fiend even admitted as much in a FB messenger chat.
-
Did you downgrade RBR though??
-
Ah, my mistake.
-
No film to look at.
Hang on, where you also spotted by a Spaniard who had cycled there from Sheffield?
-
It was very early.
-
Bit confused but think that what Will's trying to say is no cut loose 7b+, 1 cut loose 7c, 2 or more cut looses 8a?????
-
Big grades for bad beta, what's not to love? :2thumbsup:
-
Big grades for bad beta, what's not to love? :2thumbsup:
Excellent idea!
-
Bit confused but think that what Will's trying to say is no cut loose 7b+, 1 cut loose 7c, 2 or more cut looses 8a?????
I think Will wanted to give a downgrade but has backed out at the last min -with some spurious feet on / cut loose shenanigans.
Maybe we could have a crouch start mid way along the roof grade too? 😃
-
This thread should really be locked and logged now. Utter shite. Fiend even admitted as much in a FB messenger chat.
I've changed my mind. It's quite clearly a lot more pertinent than I thought.
-
Will's gone rather quiet on this pertinent matter. Is the dab potential for the taller climber on a crouch start significantly different to a smaller climber cutting loose twice on the lip slopers???
-
Will's gone rather quiet on this pertinent matter. Is the dab potential for the taller climber on a crouch start significantly different to a smaller climber cutting loose twice on the lip slopers???
Good point. If there’s no video how can we run snicko or UltraDab (tm)
-
Unfortunately no send video but I did see Will on an early session where he was just doing 6 move links. Like he says, his technique was exemplary, way way in excess of any utube clip in existence.
It was however a headtorch session so was rather dark...
-
Maybe it’s for the best that this display of climbing perfection was not captured on video. It must be such utter perfection that the very sight of it would make us all give up immediately and take up a new hobby.
-
Maybe it’s for the best that this display of climbing perfection was not captured on video. It must be such utter perfection that the very sight of it would make us all give up immediately and take up road cycling
You all know who you are... 😃
-
Will's gone rather quiet on this pertinent matter.
It seems his debatative determination in the December 2019 GE thread has addled his mind and he's now living out the fantasy of being an actual politician in response to this thread: Dodging questions, obfuscating issues with tangents about toehooks, shooting the messenger, dismissing the whole thing when it threatens his party stance.
I vote that you lot impeach him and get a new Random Downgrade Generator.
-
Okay this is well worth a bump. From the man himself:
Downgrades
Now we're talking. The mightiest numbers that toppled before my puny limbs.
Titfield Thunderbolt. 7B+ to 7A.
Colt 45. 7C to soft 7A.
Big Fish. 7B (given 7C in some places I think!) to 6C+.
The Groove (Caley). 7A to 6B+.
Losing My Edge. 7C to 7A+ (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
-
Anyone got a copy of the Steve Rhodes guide to hand? I'm sure the Groove got something like 8a / v11 in that one. This could well be a contender for the world's biggest downgrade...
-
Downgrades
Now we're talking. The mightiest numbers that toppled before my puny limbs.
Titfield Thunderbolt. 7B+ to 7A. (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
Colt 45. 7C to soft 7A. (TBF you do need a bit of lank... relative to Katz...)
Big Fish. 7B (given 7C in some places I think!) to 6C+. (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
The Groove (Caley). 7A to 6B+. (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
Losing My Edge. 7C to 7A+ (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
:2thumbsup:
-
If I'm reading the Rhodes book right then I think you're correct! English 7b/V12 :lol:
It also gives the 6C just to the right (Pocket Wall) English 6c and V10!
If you look on UKC you'll see that there's someone who has proposed 6B for it...
Compare it with the Rocking Groove thing at the same crag. Loads easier...
But evidence schmevidence when it comes to logbook padding, eh?
-
Will is just giving his opinion of the climbs he’s found easy being lanky and weak, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with this. I look forward to his personal grade for something like Digital Dilerium at Eavestone, which involved me getting my knee level with my chin :lol:
-
Ned even named a problem for you Will! 😃
http://peakbouldering.info/areas/1-eastern-grit/crags/3-baslow/boulders/49-flatworld/problems/6345-6ft-7a
-
Big Fish gets 7C+ from a sitter and 6C from a stand in the book :-\ :-\ :-\
-
The Big Fish thing is due to an error in the guide; they got the grades of that and I Am Chief Whateverhisnameis the wrong way round.
-
Downgrades
Now we're talking. The mightiest numbers that toppled before my puny limbs.
Titfield Thunderbolt. 7B+ to 7A. (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
Colt 45. 7C to soft 7A. (TBF you do need a bit of lank... relative to Katz...)
Big Fish. 7B (given 7C in some places I think!) to 6C+. (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
The Groove (Caley). 7A to 6B+. (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
Losing My Edge. 7C to 7A+ (TBF you do need a bit of lank)
:2thumbsup:
I am remember Turnbull finding losing my edge hard and he is a lanky streak of.
When I did losing my edge I thought it was 7B/C but gave it 7C to get people interested to try it.
-
When I did losing my edge I thought it was 7B/C but gave it 7C to get people interested to try it.
:-\ :-\ :-\ Surely more people would try it at 7B or 7B+??
-
There's also new beta for Losing My Edge, whereby you match the left start jug then go up to two edges on the face before heading across to the big flake thing.
Having done it both ways I reckon 7B+/C is fair for the original (which is a tough few slaps and an absolute skin shredder) and 7A+ for the new beta (which is actually a bit more pleasant climbing).
-
Speaking to a guidebook editor - they said they tended to err on the side of Upgrading problems if in doubt.
Makes people happier about a book/area if they get a little flatter to the edge. Conversely people get pissed off of stuff in the guide is always a sandbag. Of course there are always exceptions - and this wouldn’t wash in certain areas - esp where problems have had many repeats.
-
What guidebook area? Looking to plan my hols for this year :lol:
-
When I did losing my edge I thought it was 7B/C but gave it 7C to get people interested to try it.
:-\ :-\ :-\ Surely more people would try it at 7B or 7B+??
I think Dan is right, areas are always popular when there is the smell of slightly over-graded boulder problem blood in the water
-
What guidebook area? Looking to plan my hols for this year :lol:
Leavenworth 😂
-
I think Dan is right, areas are always popular when there is the smell of slightly over-graded boulder problem blood in the water
Brimham in general init; loads of average problems, on average rock, at holiday grades.
-
I think Dan is right, areas are always popular when there is the smell of slightly over-graded boulder problem blood in the water
Brimham in general init; loads of average problems, on average rock, at holiday grades.
What you trying to say Nick. LME would stand proud next to karma!
-
It's better than Ripple Effect at least :lol:
-
Grades are supposed to be assigned for a notional climber of average stature. Anyone falling significantly either side of this average should expect most grades to be inconsistent, with a fair number feeling just plain wrong. This is the reason these opinions are predictably low value unless the climber has a very thorough understanding of grade mechanics and an unearthly ability to visualise the climbing experience of an average climber probably using a different sequence. How many times must this point be made before outsized climbers stop expressing their opinions as if they carried some weight? :tease:
-
Grades are supposed to be assigned for a notional climber of average stature.
And don't forget climbing onsight? Are they though? We don't have a written consititution afaik.
All a grade can ever be is an assessment of how hard you found the problem.
Over time, from the spread of these (hopefully) we can pull an average. Any attempt to guess how hard a notional average punter would find it risks even greater obfuscation, imho.
-
There has to be a baseline/standard even if it’s not reflective of the climber making the assessment. Otherwise the grade is not just meaningless in practice but in theory also. Grading always involves trying to second guess how something feels for someone else and therefore requires a mental model of a ‘someone’. To misquote Churchill – grading for the notional average climber is the worst form of grading except all those other forms that have been tried.
The onsight thing is irrelevant to bouldering grades IMO.
Grade consensus is a luxury that might be achieved once a problem has had a good number of ascents. Assuming that is the well hasn’t been hopelessly poisoned by tall climbers stating their opinion based on how a climb felt for them without taking their height advantage into account. Climbs that are hard for the short/average tend to get a lot more ascents by giants, hence a lot more grade votes by giants. If giants don’t grade for the notional average when grade voting then the consensus will be hopelessly skewed, and inaccurate for the bulk of climbers.
-
Amen.
-
If you go to Tesco's and want to buy some Orange juice that is unfortunately positioned on the top shelf. Is the price any different if you are a tall person or small person???
-
Yes because shorties have to buy the more expensive stuff placed lower down. If they were to ask someone to get it down for them that would be the equivalent to a French start or Yorkshire spot.
-
If you go to Tesco's and want to buy some Orange juice that is unfortunately positioned on the top shelf. Is the price any different if you are a tall person or small person???
Different beta needed. Maybe a dyno?
-
Grades are supposed to be assigned for a notional climber of average stature.
I think it should also be highlighted that the average stature is across both male and female climbers (which I imagine historically wasn't necessarily the case). This means that Will is even more of an morphological anomaly than he might have realised.
-
I keep meaning to write a proper response to this but it will likely be very long, boring, and uncool.
In it I was going to make the point that the supposed "average" that grades are given for is really a male average. But the concept of the grade being for the average climber is flawed anyway.
-
Will- you doing male and female versions of your guidebook???
-
Any and all attempts to quantify difficulty are flawed, obviously. It's a question of what is the least flawed option. Which option provides the most utility, most consistently, and to the most climbers.
I'd like to hear a cogent argument for any alternative system doing this better that grading for the notional average (GFA).
The inherent gender-bias is a hangover of when the systems came into wide use. Today the mean height might be lower than the average height of an average male climber, as there are a greater number of female and youth climbers. It might be expected that this mean height will continue to change, and is variable between countries. However regrading the world would be impractical to say the least and would doubtless create more problems than it solves, so the least worst option is sticking to the previously used notional model. So long as there is a notional average, which remains unchanging, it is fairly easy for an individual to determine how far they differ from it and adjust their expectation of what a grade might mean accordingly.
Again obviously, in many/most cases grades are such a blunt instrument (for many long and boring reasons) that all of this is a meaningless abstraction. The underlying point though is that there should be a standard to anchor the system to in order to minimise this inevitable inaccuracy and people smart enough to know they are a good way either side of the average height should qualify their opinions, or face online polls and long tedious grade debates.
-
Why is height the defining variable? Why not weight, VO2 Max, ratio of index finger to ring finger, shoe size, age?
-
I'm not sure the principle is necessarily flawed, but it does seem like its foundation is wrong.
For instance, if this notional average climber (the platonic climber, the one climber who isn't cheating by being too tall/thin/whatever) was to change, then presumably you'd have to regrade climbs because they had become easier for the average? This is at odds with how I think about grades.
Grades to me are just a way of comparing different climbs against each other - not a way to compare climbs against an absolute notion of difficulty. So 7A is better defined as a collection of climbs that are about the same difficulty - there's no equation/mathematical model that perfectly defines difficulty.
So when I challenge the difficulty of a problem, more often than not it's a problem that hasn't been developed very long ago, or is likely to have changed significantly since it's first ascent (de-scrittling at Brimham/better sequences found etc). I think about how it compares to other climbs of the same difficulty and general style. This is why I can't really offer much opinion about Red Baron Roof. It's the only climb of that grade that I've done and all I know about it is that it's harder than the very small number of similar things at 7C that I've done (Underhand Extension springs to mind - though this is probably the very rock bottom end of 7C anyway).
Trying to grade for a notional average comes at the problem from the wrong direction. What's really important is that climbers of all shapes and sizes have an understanding of what 7A or whatever feels like to them.
So with the problem that bumped this thread - Pi R Squared at Norwood Edge - it gets 7C in the guidebook and I did it on my second go. Sorry if that sounds like willy waving. Let me explain. The reason I feel the need to challenge this is because having "7C second go" anywhere on my climbing C.V. is not something I'm happy with because I know that I'm not that good. It would be wholly disingenuous of me to go around crowing about it like I'd actually done a 7C second go. I appreciate that for many, 7C second go would be a disappointment, but for me it would be very near the top of my list of achievements on rock. So I challenged the grade, but also recognised that it's a morpho problem. If you haven't got the reach then it's going to be much harder. But when I say "the reach", I don't mean that it's a particularly reachy problem - it's fine for an average bloke; anyone shorter will probably struggle. People have a really mad concept of how tall I am. I'll come back to that. Also for Pi R Squared, there have only been three recorded ascents of the problem (I don't mean that only three people have done it, but only 3 people have done it and logged/video'd it). Tom (the FA) gave it 7C but noted that the holds were damp when he did it. Basically, there's no reason to assume that the given grade is some time-honoured benchmark.
On my height. I can objectively demonstrate using highly scientific instrumentation (a tape measure) that I am not some lanky ganglemorph. I might be above average height (5 foot, 10 inches) and have a modest positive ape index, but I'm by no means a freak of nature. I totally get that most of the "lanky Will Hunt" banter is just a laugh and I enjoy it, but I resent that perfectly reasonable (and valuable, I think, because so few people are actually prepared to challenge grades, even when they're wrong) opinions can just be dismissed as a "giant" "poisoning the well". Dave Warburton has exactly the same arm span as me but is a stocky fly-half of a man and has never, to my knowledge, been accused of being lanky or cheating his way up anything. It's not that I'm especially lanky, I'm just scrawny.
On the subject of height, why does nobody ever mention the massive advantage that is conferred on shorter climbers on any terrain that isn't reachy. Their natural power to weight ratio is much better and they have a signifcant edge on anything on a roof where core comes into play - which is virtually everything north of 7C+? But I've never heard anybody try and discredit somebody's big tick because a problem is easier for the short, even though many of the hardest problems are easier if you're a little shorter.
Sorry, all a bit of a rushed post and so not very robust. I may punish you all later with a fuller response, but it'll probably end up as a Cheetham-esque ramble.
-
Not all shorter climbers have a higher power to weight ratio Will :whistle:
-
Scrawny = massive advantage of naturally better power to weight ratio. Hth.
(And on the rare occasions it doesn't, it can be trained. Unlike height).
Grading is tricky for bouldering. I think it's particularly useful to mention when a problem is morpho, as some clearly are on gritstone especially, and prior warning is useful.
-
Duh.
Think of it this way. If all other things are equal, the shorter climber has a better power to weight ratio.
Imagine if I retained my current feeble musculature, but shrunk by a foot, who would the stronger climber be? 5' 10" Will or 4' 10" Will?
Or imagine if 36chambers retained his ripped physique and grew by a foot. Who would be able to pull down harder? 3' 11" NDogg, or the shorter one?
So if you assume that all things are equal and that each of these climbers has the same propensity for training and the same ability to get stronger fingers etc, the shorter climbers will get a better power to weight ratio for the same amount of training.
-
:2thumbsup:
But you are lighter than me, despite being 3 foot taller?
And although I am quite the Adonis, throbbing muscles don't necessarily equate to functional strength or power.
-
Think of it this way. If all other things are equal, the shorter climber has a better power to weight ratio.
Isn't this the same principle that Bonjoy proposed that you (partly) disagreed with? Namely that in order to have a functioning grading system one has to presume that all other things are equal except the point of difference one has chosen? I would say grading for the notionally average height of a climber has got to be more useful than grading for the notionally average P/W ratio of a climber, not least because as Fiend says, you can train P/W.
This thread is simultaneously quite interesting and deeply tedious!
-
I cross between disliking the old other channel style grades are stupid thread, and enjoying winding lanky Will up. :devangel:
-
Grades to me are just a way of comparing different climbs against each other - not a way to compare climbs against an absolute notion of difficulty. So 7A is better defined as a collection of climbs that are about the same difficulty - there's no equation/mathematical model that perfectly defines difficulty.
This is all everyone can do personally, but the output of everyone’s personal opinions gives you the ‘absolute difficulty’ of 7A (in this example).
People probably bring up your grade opinions so regularly because you do so yourself, and you generally like to allude to the idea that no one else is taking this grading lark seriously, and they are all also finding things easy but just padding their logbooks or whatever.
-
Personally Will, it grates when you say X or Y problem IS grade whatever... because that’s what you think. Not what it actually is.
Prefacing grade comments with I think it’s... or it felt like... is IMHO a better way of putting things...
-
It all comes down to how much confidence you have as yourself as a perfect yardstick of climbing difficulty doesn't it?
Upon performing unexpectedly well or poorly on a climb most people will consider whether they were having a good or bad day, whether it suits or doesn't suit their personal skills and/ or physical attributes or if they've improved or regressed in their climbing ability since they last formed an idea of what grades they can and can't climb, then consult the opinions of others, both in person and online before seriously questioning a grade, even then being aware that their experience is just part of the multilateral concensus necessary to arrive at what will always be an approximate measure.
And others just immediately go full Fiendblog and say "The grade's wrong, anyone who says it's that grade is an idiot". :lol:
-
Will - once the weather improves I'm going to take you to a crag that you've never been to before to do 40 problems. You are to say what the grades are without looking at the official guidebook. Your phone will be confiscated for the day:
10 will be onsight / flashes
10 complete after working
10 did not finishes
10 stood at the bottom and said- "yer that's about..."
Less hearsay and more facts!
You are welcome to go on a diet before this benchmarking day...
-
I don't know the problems in question so can't comment, but what strikes me is the size of the downgrades. 7C to 6C? That's Si O'Connor territory!
-
I'm not sure the principle is necessarily flawed, but it does seem like its foundation is wrong......Sorry, all a bit of a rushed post and so not very robust. I may punish you all later with a fuller response, but it'll probably end up as a Cheetham-esque ramble.
The lanky doth protest too much methinks.
-
I don't know the problems in question so can't comment, but what strikes me is the size of the downgrades. 7C to 6C? That's Si O'Connor territory!
To be fair to Will (urgh) there are good reasons for all of those listed:
Titfield Thunderbolt. 7B+ to 7A. - Will's a lanky sod
Colt 45. 7C to soft 7A. - Will's a lanky sod (and the FA is tiny)
Big Fish. 7B (given 7C in some places I think!) to 6C+. - Will's a lanky sod (and guidebook grade wrong)
The Groove (Caley). 7A to 6B+. - Will's a lanky sod
Losing My Edge. 7C to 7A+ (TBF you do need a bit of lank) - Will's a lanky sod (and new sequence found)
;)
Grades to me are just a way of comparing different climbs against each other - not a way to compare climbs against an absolute notion of difficulty. So 7A is better defined as a collection of climbs that are about the same difficulty
I think this is problematic, as very few boulders actually bear much resemblance to others. It's not so bad when the problems climb over the same rough bit of rock (Demon Wall Roof, for example) but even then there can be massive variances.
And that's without taking account of the significant differences climbers can feel day-to-day when climbing, conditions, styles, climbing history/skillset, whether you had a good night's sleep, etc., as well as progression.
If I do a 7C, and then a year later do another one, how can I possibly compare the two effectively when I've presumably racked up a year of climbing and training in between, and a vast array of factors are almost certain to have changed? Unless you assume you're on one big plateau all the time. Or you go back immediately and do the first one to compare, which no one does.
If you approach it in that way, you're trying to compare something which is fixed (the problem), using a measure that is swirling, nebulous and entirely changeable (your skills, strength, mentality, health, opinions, etc.).
I don't necessarily have an alternative though.
-
Do away with grades for difficulty in favour of how good / satisfying something is?
I've definitely done stuff at the top of my grade (and TBF, been happy with the ego-tick / HALAM etc) that wasn't even 1% as satisfying as doing Crescent Arete again.
-
And although I am quite the Adonis, throbbing muscles don't necessarily equate to functional strength or power.
Now that's my new motto!!
Do away with grades for difficulty in favour of how good / satisfying something is?
I've definitely done stuff at the top of my grade (and TBF, been happy with the ego-tick / HALAM etc) that wasn't even 1% as satisfying as doing Crescent Arete again.
LOL, that will never catch on. Can you imagine anyone choosing a 3 star hard-for-the-grade 7A+ over a 1 start soft 7C eliminate?? Barbaric 1980s shit that.
-
The issue with Will is - with all due respect - he's a punter trapped inside a good climber's body. Inside he still views himself as that half-arsed keen youth who mashed himself on some Froggatt E2 (and maybe others think the same), but in reality he's suddenly found himself in a highly optimal slightly-above-average-height body with a positive (a few inches? many?) ape index, and the utterly crucial "scrawny" frame with those puny muscles no doubt very effective per mass at pulling hard on minging gritstone slopers. Who knows there might even be technique and flexibility too. It must be quite confusing hence the determination to avoid admitting he can actually climb quite hard, and finding a difficult balancing act trying to avoid score-card padding while simultaneously trying to give a fair assessment of all these obscure badly-graded Yorkshire gems...
Cheque: that was mostly about adjectival trad grades which are thankfully a matter of objective fact corresponding to realities in the world e.g. existence or otherwise of protection, rest ledges, visible lines, solid rock, exposure etc etc.
-
I've not bothered to read all this thread... but in the real world, I think most people just grade things on how they feel for them, compared (broadly) to other things in a similar style. No more, no less.
-
I think one problem is that people are almost always much happier to downgrade a problem they found easy than upgrade one they found hard. Which tends to a lead to a general slide of grades in one direction. In fact we proudly call some problems 'classic sandbags' rather than admitting they're probably under-graded.
-
Accuracy is almost as much a lost cause as TTT's quality focus...
-
Of the 2 boulder problems of mine that Will repeated last year, Will downgraded one (lank) and very tentatively almost upgraded the other (core intensive). I personally don't see a slide one way or another...
-
Bull Rider was the corey one. What was the other?
P.S. the idea that you can be outlanked by anybody is preposterous!
-
The issue with Will is - with all due respect - he's a punter trapped inside a good climber's body. Inside he still views himself as that half-arsed keen youth who mashed himself on some Froggatt E2 (and maybe others think the same), but in reality he's suddenly found himself in a highly optimal slightly-above-average-height body with a positive (a few inches? many?) ape index, and the utterly crucial "scrawny" frame with those puny muscles no doubt very effective per mass at pulling hard on minging gritstone slopers. Who knows there might even be technique and flexibility too. It must be quite confusing hence the determination to avoid admitting he can actually climb quite hard, and finding a difficult balancing act trying to avoid score-card padding while simultaneously trying to give a fair assessment of all these obscure badly-graded Yorkshire gems...
Cheque: that was mostly about adjectival trad grades which are thankfully a matter of objective fact corresponding to realities in the world e.g. existence or otherwise of protection, rest ledges, visible lines, solid rock, exposure etc etc.
Solid post
-
Hangingstone Dyno, a problem for proper lanksters...
-
Grades are always at best a best a rough indication of difficulty and are often pretty meaningless beyond a certain point.
A good example is deliverance which probably varies at least 2 grades depending on height and reach (7A/+ for the tall 7B for average height people, and 7B+ if you're short)
Equally there are problems which involve pulling on minging crimps, and are absolutely desperate if you don't have baby sized fingers.
-
It was always a bit of a laugh and a joke, but now the peaks gotten downgraded it's all gone a bit serious...
-
Christ, I know. Can you imagine, there might be some poor sod reading the Power Club gobbledegook and actually taking it seriously instead of the giant pisstake it is. Still, I guess if that poor sod doesn't have anything to do with writing guidebooks then it might all blow over....
-
On the subject of height, why does nobody ever mention the massive advantage that is conferred on shorter climbers on any terrain that isn't reachy. Their natural power to weight ratio is much better
I weighed myself on Monday and discovered myself to be 69kg, some 5kg heavier than I was whenever the last time I weighed myself was (Ed: 64kg then)
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Well it's all making sense. FWIW The Ondra is 5'11" and 70kg-ish fighting weight with his chunky big-waller legs, and at least 2" of the extra height is neck length so hardly a reach advantage.
The question isn't "Why is Will pissing up a load of 7Bs and downgrading them all??" , it's "Why isn't Will pissing up a load of 8Bs and downgrading them??" . Seriously Will get on something that's actually difficult and put that highly optimal (and desirable) lank and scrawn to good use. It might even be more fun when you're not grossly underperforming.
Meanwhile I'm off to downgrade some HSes (that happen to suit someone who is 5'8" and actually 79kg (not a typo)...toodle-ooo!
-
Only 79kg? 😂😛
-
Yes....
If you retreat to a zen meditative spa for, say, 3 months, to cleanse your mind of all other thoughts, you might have the quantum-computing level of brainpower available to calculate just what a colossal sore point and gigantic source of constant frustration that is. It may involve imaginary numbers (which can then be downgraded blah blah)
-
Retreat to a child free existence for 3 months more like 😃
It was a cheap shot. Sorry. Strap me in a 10kg weight vest next time we go out climbing...
-
Child free and zen like calm are probably very similar - and hypothetical - ideologies for many semi-recent parents!
Anyway the correct response is "Yes Fiend, we know, because you keep fucking bleating on about it". To which my reply is of course "Whatever, I will stop fucking bleating on about my weigh when, say, Shark stops bleating on about the fucking Oak*".
* - edit: unless of course he actually does the damn thing and does indeed stop mentioning it, after in the obligatory year of celebrating such a glorious destination after 12/13/27 years of miserable journey, in which case I'll go back on my word.
But back on topic, my point is the same as previous: Will is pretty good, for obvious reasons, and the downgrading nonsense is because he's quite a bit better than the bloques he's tinkering around on. Mystery solved.
-
P.S. You stopped going out climbing with me....because I've been contaminated by climbing with Gapescrote, right??
-
P.S. You stopped going out climbing with me....because I've been contaminated by climbing with Gapescrote, right??
Nope - just time and location etc...
plus - I like esoterica but... 😃
-
You got me up to bloody Blackstone Edge!!!
-
You got me up to bloody Blackstone Edge!!!
Thats not esoteric - just got a long walk in :) If it were 5 min from the car and 15 min from sheffield centre it would be rammed..
-
Matt, by all means go and do one of these problems some time. Then your opinion may be worth more than nothing.
-
Opinion? I've cleared the whole bloody mess up. Everyone should be relieved. Especially you, go fill up your 8a.nu scorecard with a clear conscience.
TT - anything would be rammed if it was 5 mins car / 15 mins Sheff, people climb at the The Tor and Horseshoe ffs.
-
Being a nerd I decided to test my hypothesis that people are happier to downgrade than upgrade a problem. I took the top twenty problems on peakbouldering.info and compared their current guidebook grade against how people had voted.
The average grade discrepancy was a downgrade of -0.08526 (where -1 grade would be 7a+ to 7a). Needless to say it is not statistically significant.
So there you are Will, downgrade to your heart's content, backed up by dodgy science! ;D
-
Matt, by all means go and do one of these problems some time. Then your opinion may be worth more than nothing.
As you've now starting downgrading problems I've done, I would agree that they are soft for the taller gent (and probably very soft the tall and light gent).
Alliance - Always been a soft touch if you can span, I assume it kept it's grade as it's high and impossible for the short. I enjoyed it though.
Monochrome - With good beta it feels fine, I climbed it when not getting up other 7Bs so probably soft but "stronger" people than me were struggling. Regardless of grade, it is a fantastic problem.
Boyager - I haven't been on this but it's on my list for this winter. Grade seems to fluctuate and from feedback it seems to flatter the taller climber.
So, you seem to be finding problems that favour the taller climber easier than the grade. Quelle surprise?
-
Look, I find stuff totally piss all the time. The trick is to just to muster up a toothy grin, a wry shake of the head, and then take the grade.
Now can this be logpiled
-
Matt, by all means go and do one of these problems some time. Then your opinion may be worth more than nothing.
As you've now starting downgrading problems I've done, I would agree that they are soft for the taller gent (and probably very soft the tall and light gent).
Alliance - Always been a soft touch if you can span, I assume it kept it's grade as it's high and impossible for the short. I enjoyed it though.
Monochrome - With good beta it feels fine, I climbed it when not getting up other 7Bs so probably soft but "stronger" people than me were struggling. Regardless of grade, it is a fantastic problem.
Boyager - I haven't been on this but it's on my list for this winter. Grade seems to fluctuate and from feedback it seems to flatter the taller climber.
So, you seem to be finding problems that favour the taller climber easier than the grade. Quelle surprise?
Those are just the three problems I did on Saturday.
I said Boyager depends entirely on what you can do with your heels and whether you can clamp both sides from the off. To me it felt like a 6C+, maybe 7A. Other people in our group found it much harder because they have tiny arms. Hardly surprising.
Monochrome. I looked back through some old threads on here from around the time it was done. I'm certainly not the first to suggest it's easier than 7B. It's less than a decade old and has probably cleaned up and had its beta refined loads since the FA. Hardly surprising if people are suggesting downgrades. I think it would probably be 7A+ if it was in Font. The grade isn't that far out.
The Alliance. Morpho in the extreme. No downgrade suggested.
I do think that Fiend's whitterings have blown this out of all proportion. If anybody actually cares enough to list out the problems where I've suggested the grade is seriously out, you'll probably find that there's not that many of them and that the problems are generally newish or have had a new sequence found on them or have cleaned up significantly since the FA. Moreover, if you look at comments on UKC you'll find that other people are saying exactly the same thing, just not on this particular forum.
-
The Alliance. Morpho in the extreme. No downgrade suggested.
And that's the one I thought everyone thinks is soft (if you have the span)
I do think that Fiend's whitterings have blown this out of all proportion.
I think everyone is just enjoying taking the piss/niggling to be fair.
-
Will, the way you phrased things in Power Club does suggest you enjoy keeping the ball rolling.........
-
Hmmm. You bumped this thread after I posted a jokey write up of a day out in Power Club. I thought this was an act of mercy to break up the drudgery of the usual litany of max hangs and kettle bell routines. Maybe you've taken it too seriously?
This thread should really have been logpiled on page one.
-
Well it's all making sense. FWIW The Ondra is 5'11" and 70kg-ish fighting weight with his chunky big-waller legs, and at least 2" of the extra height is neck length so hardly a reach advantage.
This made me lol.
On this subject, Will is clearly not massively tall (by my standards anyway) but how is the ape index?
-
Ha ha ha- just found a website that "helps shorter folk find climbs in Fontainebleau to suit them"
Obviously not being heightist I shall not be sharing the URL, but shall make for very interesting reading as to what goes up and what goes down...
-
I think will should have his height/ape index in his profile to reduce the asking of this question. Can the mods make this happen?
-
Dunny- why not have another poll to decide what Wills ape index is? 😃
-
Maybe by bird type.... :goodidea:
-
Not sure this is the right place but it (and the scarf) made me laugh:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B81yBBklVGY/?igshid=ut2lsgk9cem8
(Red was given 8A and Fuoco di Paglia 8A+/B)
-
Haha nice, shots fired! Tagging the FA in the post as well :boxing:
-
Bout time this thread was sent to the logpile. It's been well over a week since Will downgraded anything...
-
Bout time this thread was sent to the logpile. It's been well over a week since Will downgraded anything...
I reckon he’s probably got a few in the can for Almscliff he’s keeping until someone notes that they did a problem:
“Pistol Whip, I thought more 6C+ myself as it’s certainly easier than my 7A FA Pistachios Are Not The Only Nut at Windy Choss Clough”
-
Who told you about Windy Choss Clough?
:ninja:
-
Not sure this is the right place but it (and the scarf) made me laugh:
https://www.instagram.com/p/B81yBBklVGY/?igshid=ut2lsgk9cem8
(Red was given 8A and Fuoco di Paglia 8A+/B)
Scarf has a big "Stu Littlefair flashing Alta*" vibe from the old OTE Font Guide.
*I think it was Alta, it's a while since I looked at the guide.