1

diet, training and injuries / Re: One for the runners

« Last post by steveri on Today at 04:12:08 pm »

I take an entirely flippant view based on if it works for me. Graeme Obree penalised by the UCI for backroom mods, new positions, setting the hour record on a sawn off child's bicycle seat. Legend. Routes being tamed by a sneaky kneebar. Kudos to you for cunning. Sticky rubber, I'm in. High heelhooks, envious of anyone under 30 for whom this comes naturally.

Billion pound megacorp finding 4% from carbon implants. You could see it coming when para athletes started going super fast based on the best R&D backup. Not happy now that every club event is dominated by £240 foootwear, 'Cheat Shoes' in my club Whatsapp. I almost needed therapy the first time I paid a hundred pounds for shoes. And then again when the same shoes finally made it into Sportsshoes 'last year's model listing'.

The genie's out of the box now and there's too much vested interest in keeping them there.

2

chuffing / Re: Does E4 for WSS make sense?

« Last post by Johnny Brown on Today at 04:12:00 pm »

But truth is, the only way what JB is saying actually hangs together is if you take the two halfs of WSS completely separately and pretend there was a ledge in the middle.  So you have a Font 7B+ pitch and then an E4 pitch.
I assume that conceptually at least, that's what he's talking about.

Presumably you’ve already worked out that, no, that’s not what I mean. Obviously a ledge in the middle would make it easier!

The reason we don’t use these grades any more is because a) font grades offer finer gradations and, b) people pad them out. But if you look through the old guides to Burbage and Caley etc, they make perfect sense to me.

3

music, art and culture / Re: Games, games, games

« Last post by Durbs on Today at 04:07:26 pm »

Been enjoying Manor Lord or Game Pass (PC).

Beautiful game, and given it's pretty much a one-man team it's insane how full of a pre-release it is. It also runs incredibly well.

It's not finished yet, and I think it'll be interesting to see if they get the ultimate micro/macro management level right - but for me it's a Civilisation levels "shit, where did the time go? it's 2am and I've got work tomorrow" addiction.

4

chuffing / Re: Does E4 for WSS make sense?

« Last post by Johnny Brown on Today at 03:59:50 pm »

As I said earlier, it feels 6a. If it was really easy to climb up the bottom, and there was a better rest, but without impacting the landing, I could see it being E2. If you traversed in from the left for example, which is about 5b, I think you’d be into borderline E2. So you do get something for the start being 7a.

5

chuffing / Re: Does E4 for WSS make sense?

« Last post by Fultonius on Today at 03:33:05 pm »

7B+/E4 5c (or whatever the fucking top half of fucking WSS is as I have no fucking idea...) would convey things much better for the soloist.

However, I'd maybe argue by the sounds of things, that the top alone is maybe only E3? So F7B+/E35c?

Can someone now please go out and find a new boulder/micro route and call it:

Weathering the Bell Curve? And grade it E4 Jellyfish? 

6

chuffing / Re: Does E4 for WSS make sense?

« Last post by Johnny Brown on Today at 03:25:59 pm »

A tech grade of 7a is entirely and completely meaningless, so I have the same problem with something being graded E4 7a as I do with  something being graded E4 Jellyfish.

 

This has made my day.

Otherwise, the thing to remember with trad grades for micro-routes/ highballs, is that BOULDER PROBLEMS DON’T GET E GRADES. So if the main difficulty on a micro route is a boulder problem, it has very little bearing on the overall grade. Reasons to put WSS up to E5 would not so much bear on the boulder problem, it would be if there was no jugs, no rest, no easy opportunity to traverse off, or more likely a worse landing. Look at The Art of White Hat Wearing for example, which is shorter than WSS and slightly easier, but got E5 because the landing is worse. And if you think I’m mental, remember when the landing was improved, some people lamented the loss of a once proud E5!

7

chuffing / Re: Does E4 for WSS make sense?

« Last post by Fultonius on Today at 03:21:21 pm »

Font6B into existing top of WSS: E3 6a
Font6C into existing top of WSS: E3 6b
Font7A into existing top of WSS: E3 6b/c
Font7B into existing top of WSS: E4 6c


It really is that simple.

Case dismissed, your honour....

8

chuffing / Re: Does E4 for WSS make sense?

« Last post by cheque on Today at 03:13:12 pm »

Worth keeping in mind that the last guidebook to list WSS with only a trad grade was published in 1991. There’s only ever been one guide that mentions E4 in its description of it since the adoption of bouldering grades and that came out 19 years ago.

9

news / Re: significant repeats

« Last post by Nemo on Today at 03:03:57 pm »

With sport routes and boulders, typically significant downgrades only happen when people find better beta.
The vast majority of people (at least those who travel to at least some extent) climbing at that level tend to roughly agree about grades when they've used the same beta (with obvious exceptions for height dependent stuff etc).

With UK trad routes people can climb exactly the same sequence and yet come up with a completely different grade as they are using a completely different grading system.  That's not sensible.  Sure sponsors, public opinion, beta and all the rest of it are always going to play a part, but sorting out what the numbers are actually meant to represent is a pre requisite to even bothering trying to assign something a number.

10

chuffing / Re: Does E4 for WSS make sense?

« Last post by andy moles on Today at 03:03:40 pm »

something being graded E4 Jellyfish.

Sounds about right for some routes on the Orme.