|
|
1
« Last post by Wellsy on Today at 11:52:34 am »
Everyone criticising the BMC, that I have seen, has shown a lot of support for volunteers and most of the staff
Thr criticism is almost always the leadership (fair), the running of GB Climbing (also fair), and the financial controls (extra mega fair) which have all been rather poor to say the least. Saying "the BMC does other good stuff!" Is neither here nor there. We know. It's the stuff that is bad that is getting the criticism. And the BMC needs to actually sort that out.
2
« Last post by petejh on Today at 11:48:10 am »
Sound logic and reason will get you nowhere jwi - the British E grade isn't a utilitarian tool for defining and labelling difficulty of climbs in order to make identifying suitable challenges more straightforward; like morris dancing isn't just about having a dance. Both are about celebrating a niche British culture which traditionalists don't want to lose.
I think British trad climbing has roots in/is influenced by the British class system, because it's unavoidable like the water you swim in (and something I don't like which is perhaps why I'd be happy for the E-grade to be adjusted to get rid of the tech part). When you change how to define British trad climbs to a more universally understood definition you remove some of the power of the culture. Away from the more obviously-amazing British cliffs, UK trad routes like lots of climbs worldwide are only 'special', to use JB's words, because of the culture surrounding them - i.e. the people and the stories told by them and about them - not because of the outstanding quality of climbing or magnificence of the situation relative to anywhere else. Traditionalists like JB are imo against change less for rational utilitarian reasons, and more because they're emotionally attached to a niche culture and how they see themselves fitting into it, and to a wider idea of being British.
3
« Last post by SA Chris on Today at 11:28:03 am »
Which is fair enough given that generally in the US trad climbing = crack climbing due to the nature of the rock over there, and the popularity of places with quality climbs of this "genre".
4
I’m not convinced the crux of Right Wall would be 4b off the deck? Obviously it isn't. Much as I'd like to think Nemo is exaggerating for comic effect, I don't think he is. It's not hard to see how you'd reach the conclusion that tech grades don't work, or stop at 6c, if this is the foundation for your wobbly logic. I do expect E4 to be defined the same way everywhere, otherwise E4 doesn't mean anything.
the tech grade not having a clear definition... I've never seen a grading system clearly defined. They all attempt the same thing - reduce the overall difficulty to a single number. The only variation is the grade width, and cultural differences in how they're applied. I don’t get this bit; 9aR for Pearson’s thing for example still lets you know it’s amongst the physically hardest trad pitches ever climbed I understood it as ‘something special’ referred to the ‘imbued cultural differences’ Partly that, partly the fact that 8c+ is a 35 year old grade of which hundreds of examples exist. E11 or 12 not so much. The above, for routes over about E6 has already been adopted in many guidebooks. Weirdly I've never see one. Which ones? E12?
Bon Voyage 9a Annot (France) ... etc Good effort pulling all that together, although given I joined the chat to explain the application of the E4 grade, I'm not sure we're having the same discussion. Is there a clearer logic you can discern in here? Sources in particular would also be useful given that we've very little knowledge of these routes between us, but appreciate that might be a job for someone else. For the grit ones I do know a bit about, from a quick google I can't find sources for the given french grades - are they yours? Whereas the news reports do inevitably use uk tech grades, occasionally font. So I can see why french route grades might make sense on similar terrain to sport like Pembroke, but the argument is much less strong elsewhere. I think that it is useful to have wider grade bands for trad as there are more confounding variables on trad routes Agreed. The strength of the Uk system is, I think, that you have two elements, both quite broad, so individually the elements are more likely to be accurate for most people, but the combination of the two also brings precision as well as the flagging of variables. non-British climbers who have been exposed to the system would switch to the British adjectival system, but we do not Whereas Uk climbers abroad inevitably return convinced of it's superiority (I'm not talking about E7+ here), but also when the hardest routes are done outside the Uk, a uk trad grade is often offered. But as illustrated by this thread, I think there are issues getting to grips with it, particularly if you are an experienced climber who already understands other grades. At first it seems the same, but then you come across the exceptions... it is easier to discard it as nonsense than have the humility to understand. The cultural element is also strong - I often think about pure crack pitches in YDS, because that's what most of them were given. 5.11+ might typically be something like E4 5b, but the vagueness can sometimes be more descriptive.
5
« Last post by jwi on Today at 10:25:06 am »
What grade system we use is largely dependent on the users: first-ascensionists, early repeaters, climbers and guide-book writers.
In Scandinavia this has led to replacing Scandi grades with French grades for sport, but keeping Scandi grades for trad. The Scandi grades has 25% wider grade-bands but otherwise follow the same logic as French grades.
In the US they often quote grades as 5.13- 5.13 5.13 for trad and 5.13a - d for sport, making the bands 33% wider for trad. Same tendency.
I think that it is useful to have wider grade bands for trad as there are more confounding variables on trad routes; it is harder to reliably estimate the physical difficulty of a route when you also struggle with putting in pieces and are sometimes a bit freaked out etc.
I suspect that the wider grade-bands is the main advantage of the adjective grades over French grades for UK trad as well. Because the system does not appear inherently much better than any other system to grade trad routes. If it was, non-British climbers who have been exposed to the system would switch to the British adjectival system, but we do not.
6
« Last post by Wellsy on Today at 09:10:32 am »
"Who would possibly relate uk tech grades to sport grades? That would make no sense."
Errrr. Anyone trying to give the UK tech grade to any long hard route to satisfy the likes of yourself or an old skool guidebook writer, when they know perfectly well how hard it is in Fr grades.
"E9 6c and E11 7a do tell you rather more. As much, or more, as 7b+ X and 8c+ R?"
But not anywhere near as much as what you actually should have, which is E9 Fr7b+ and E11 Fr8c+
I'm not saying anything terribly novel here.
The above, for routes over about E6 has already been adopted in many guidebooks.
"Because 8c+ R doesn't suggest something special, whereas E12 might"
Sure. On that we're agreed. As said many times now, I'm NOT trying to get rid of E grades. I'm trying to make them actually work as a coherent system at all levels of difficulty. I agree that if used properly, they're better than all the alternatives for grading trad routes.
"Unless you're saying the UK trad grade is *not* a measure of how hard it is to onsight."
It is up to around E7. As I said before, on stuff above this, it's not in practice how it's used. Things E8 and above are graded on how hard they are to headpoint (and indeed some may be utterly ridiculous to even consider onsighting - doesn't mean they're given E15).
The question is not 'are E-grades perfect' it's 'is there a better system?' If top climbers found it unusable, they would have adopted something like the above. Why haven't they?
They have. You just seem to not have noticed. It looks like this (and this is obviously a very small subset of routes over E9 to illustrate the discussion - there's clearly loads of info missing - just posted where I got to with it earlier in the half an hour I had to play with):
E12?
Bon Voyage 9a Annot (France) James Pearson (2023), Adam Ondra
Hard E11 ?
Echo Wall 8c/8c+ Ben Nevis Dave Macleod (2008)
E11
Power Ranger 8c+ James Pearson (2017)
Tribe 9a/9a+ Cadarese (Italy) Jacopo Larcher (2019), James Pearson
The Best Things... 9a William Moss (2023)
Crown Royale 9a Norway Pete Whittaker (2023)
Hard E10 / E11?
Rhapsody 8c/8c+ Dumbarton Dave Macleod (2006), >3 repeats
Lexicon 8b+ Pavey Ark Neil Gresham (2021), >3 repeats
Meltdown 8c+ Yosemite (US) Beth Rodden (2008), >3 repeats
The Recovery Drink 8c+ Norway Nicolas Favresse (2013), Daniel Jung, Pete Whittaker
E10
Choronzon 8b+ Pembroke Neil Mawson (2014), Steve McClure
Equilibrium 8b+ Burbage Neil Bentley (2000), Neil Gresham, James Pearson
The Groove 8b Cratcliffe James Pearson
Baron Greenback Direct 8b+ Wimberry Pete Whittaker
To Hell And Back 7c+ Hell’s Lum Dave Macleod (2007), Dave Birkett
Le Voyage 8b+ Annot (France) James Pearson (2017). >3 repeats, including a flash by Sebastien Berthe.
Magic Line 8c Ron Kauk (1996), Lonnie Kauk, Hazel Findlay, Carlo Traversi
The Bull 8b+ Jeremy Smith (2013), Ben Harnden
The Bigger Baron 8b+ Pete Whittaker (2014)
Stranger Than Fiction 8c Mason Earle (2015), Brittany Goris, Lor Sabourin, Pete Whittaker
GreatNess Wall 8c Steve McClure (2019)
Century Crack 8c Tom Randall (2011), Pete Whittaker, Danny Parker, Fumiya Nakamura
E9/10
Hold Fast Hold True 8a/8a+ Glen Nevis Julian Lines (2013), Iain Small, Franco Cookson
Hard E9
Face Mecca 7c+ Cloggy Nick Dixon (1989)
Widdop Wall 8a+/8b Widdop John Dunne (1998), Jordan Buys
E9
The Long Hope Route 8b Dave Macleod
The Walk Of Life 8a+ Dyer’s Lookout James Pearson
Dark Religion 8a+ Dinas Mot James McCaffie (2016)
Holdfast 7c+ Glen Nevis Dave Macleod (2002)
The Fugue 8a+ Glen Croe Dave Macleod (2002)
Achemine 8b Dumbarton Dave Macleod (2001)
If Six Was Nine 8a+ Iron Crag Dave Birkett (1992)
Indian Face 7b+ Cloggy Johnny Dawes (1986)
Mission Impossible 8a+ Ogwen Neil Carson
Something’s Burning 8a+/8b Pembroke Charlie Woodburn (2012)
The Big Issue 8b Pembroke John Dunne
The Prow Font 8A+ Kyloe In Andy Earl
Captain Invincible 8b/8b+ Burbage South Sean Miles (1991)
Baron Greenback 8a+ Wimberry Pete Whittaker (2013), Ben Bransby
Gerty Berwick Font 8A Ilkley Ryan Pasquill (2009), James Pearson
The Lizard King 8a+ Ilkley Jacob Cook (2014)
Muy Caliente 8a+ Pembroke Tim Emmett
Clearly there's a LOT more to add into that (huge numbers of routes missing, probably lots wrong in the above). As and when I (or probably better someone else) have time, I'll try and improve it, but it may be later in the year.
But it's fine for demonstrating that the above is actually a cohesive grading system. Giving all the above 6c, 7a or whatever, is not useful and it's not how pretty much anyone climbing those routes thinks about it.
Or at least, it could be a cohesive grading system, if everyone can agree how E grades should actually be applied, particularly for shorter routes.
I don't know anything about E-grades but your list would tend to suggest that if something is 8b+ it is E10 at a minimum and if something is 9a it is E11 at a minimum So is it kind of a case of maybe, take the route grade in french, assume its bolted, safe, pleasant etc. Whats that E-grade? Then add on potentially more if it's spicy/dangerous/lethal?
7
« Last post by sherlock on Today at 07:16:40 am »
8
« Last post by Offwidth on Yesterday at 07:55:31 pm »
As I said, serious mistakes were made. However they were people issues (and people can break the best of governance systems). However, in the last couple of years, the hundreds of volunteers and staff (away from leadership and governance) just got on with their good work. Why punish them for mistakes in leadership (mistakes that are already a good way to being fixed).
Simon has been a real help on pressuring for financial openness (his was one of the first points I raised when I joined Council), sadly he was a bit late to this 'gig', as Council were working towards resolution last March. If you have concerns let your Council reps know: evidence from members was how we broke the internal governance communication 'log jam' last spring.
I wish someone else would speak up about this excellent work in really difficult times (since 2017 really, but especially in covid and 2023)... I've just finished a monthly national access meeting celebrating some past BMC work and a discussion on how this is leading to future similar developments and better relationships with conservation groups.
9
« Last post by mic_b on Yesterday at 06:37:38 pm »
I tried this today after seeing in it on the routes cleaned or re equipped thread.
I managed to boulder it out to a good flat crimp and big rh sidepull but was struggling to do the move to the big flake.
Is it just take the small sharp 3 finger crimp with lh and flick all the way to the bottom of the big flake with rh or is there a better way I was missing?
Also what's the gear beta after the flake?
10
Why haven't they? Because 8c+ R doesn't suggest something special, whereas E12 might.
I don’t get this bit; 9aR for Pearson’s thing for example still lets you know it’s amongst the physically hardest trad pitches ever climbed, and not a total clip up either; I don’t see what the extreme grade adds?
Top UK climbers probably like E grades as double digit ones are way better for column inches due to the punter interest!
I understood it as ‘something special’ referred to the ‘imbued cultural differences’ ‘I find grading interesting - it arises universally with systems that should be easily translatable, but aren't, because simple number scales become imbued with cultural differences. I think it's more interesting to try to understand the differences in application than to try to homogenise them.’
|
|
Recent Posts