UKBouldering.com

the shizzle => chuffing => Topic started by: stevie haston on November 08, 2008, 10:09:42 am

Title: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 08, 2008, 10:09:42 am
As you lot know more about Britain and the state of play, I thought I,d ask what you thought as my knowledge really is only about North Wales. Were these recent thrashings the Promise got significant or were they about time? Was the route over graded? Should you use pads on routes and then poo poo their difficulty(toy boy-by the way very old school route). Parthian Shot looks like it still needs a good ascent to me(better or perfect) and is it really a hard route when you consider something like Shaune Miles route Captain Fantastic? Is Grit stone especially the shorter type a bit overhyped?Would a route like Ugly in North Wales take much longer for some one to do than the Promise?  Is the over hyping of routes a bit over the top, and making a mockery of british climbing.
I am astounded by the bouldering standards in Britain but am dismayed that there seems to be ony one 9a climber and only a few (couple )8c+ climbers. Is the problem lack of money, lack of desire, lasyness, fashion, an imbalance of full rock craft skills. Are the mags and media short changing you, or are you actually helping.E grades were screwed up in my day, but that was more than 20 years ago, no one has sorted the wierd inflation some routes have had. If you give the Promise even E8 with a pad what would you give an Alain Robert solo of a Fr 8b which is higher. I am interested in your opinion. My opinion is that of all the types of climbing its only in Bouldering that the brits doing Ok. Mclure is the shining and only exception to the dearth of sport climbers,and as for Alpinists I wont even comment. Yours Stevie.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: dave on November 08, 2008, 10:43:46 am
I don't think the Promise got a "thrashing", some guys (wads) just found an easier sequence than the FA. Its not a crime to miss the easiest beta. The height of the route doesn't enter into is. If alain robert fell off soloing a 40m 8b then he'd be just as dead as if james had fallen off a 7m E10 into a bad landing.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 08, 2008, 10:46:09 am
Good topic.

0:02 off the top of my head:

Quote
Were these recent thrashings the Promise got significant or were they about time? Was the route over graded?
Thrashings?? Hmmm. Overgraded?? A bit. Look at it this way, a grade is estimated and then altered later on. In this case there's a lot of factors that have affected the grade:
1. Natural vagueness/variation in grade estimates.
2. Natural vagueness of Americans not being totally au fait with UK grading.
3. Easier sequence used by Kevin J
4. Americans trusted the slider, Keenus didn't.
5. Americans used a couple of pads, Keenus didn't.
Given all those factors it's not at all surprising that the initial estimate get re-evaluated.

Quote
Should you use pads on routes and then poo poo their difficulty(toy boy-by the way very old school route).
I think Ned and Dan are being tongue-in-cheek with their poo-pooing. But yes a stack of pads changes things and yes that is the new style coming forth, but I don't see that as any problem.

Quote
Parthian Shot looks like it still needs a good ascent to me(better or perfect)
It's there for the taking indeed. Can't be that we're getting that much of a thrashing if it took Kevin J several attempts and many falls...

Quote
and is it really a hard route when you consider something like Shaune Miles route Captain Fantastic?
See above. Hard enough that Kevin J didn't piss it. Obviously gets more attention than CF because it's more famous.

Quote
Is Grit stone especially the shorter type a bit overhyped?
Overhyped in difficulty or in quality?? I think the difficulty of many routes is changing with the padpoint ascents but I don't see any mystery there. These routes were hard before (tricky technical climbing, no gear, bad landings) and now a new protection form comes along that makes them easier. Just like many previous protection improvements. So they're now easier....sobeit.

Quote
Would a route like Ugly in North Wales take much longer for some one to do than the Promise?
I don't know but it should definitely be getting more attention!!

Quote
Is the over hyping of routes a bit over the top, and making a mockery of british climbing.
Maybe it is a bit over-hyped but I think that's just a residue from the Hard Grit era when these things were soloed not highballed and were actually hard. Maybe grit will be re-viewed not as a heinously hard speciality rock type but as a fantasticly good highball arena for many routes.

Quote
I am astounded by the bouldering standards in Britain but am dismayed that there seems to be ony one 9a climber and only a few (couple )8c+ climbers.
That would be one multiple 9a+ climber. And a few more 8c+/9a climbers, albeit some of whom aren't so active.

Quote
Is the problem lack of money, lack of desire, lasyness, fashion, an imbalance of full rock craft skills.
The problem is weather, weather, weather and weather. That and lack of sponsorship (obviously) and lack of decent sport climbing here. This isn't the south of france or Catalunya. There's a limited amount of sport rock here, most of it is ugly, polished and seeping. There's a limited season and limited routes.

UK bouldering on the other hand is significantly better than UK sport climbing - I'd put the totality of Pennine grit as world class, top 5 in the world venues.

Quote
Are the mags and media short changing you, or are you actually helping.
I don't know. They seem to be doing a pretty good and enthusiastic job of promoting UK climbing.

Quote
E grades were screwed up in my day, but that was more than 20 years ago, no one has sorted the wierd inflation some routes have had.
I don't think they're that screwed up, the system makes sense and generally people keep it in check. Just because an American did it in this case isn't that significant. The main problem is you lot screwing up tech grades...

Quote
If you give the Promise even E8 with a pad what would you give an Alain Robert solo of a Fr 8b which is higher.
Depends on the nature of the 8b, the landing, and how secure or otherwise it is. Maybe it would be quite a hard E-grade. But also bear in mind that AR is a total solo specialist. But so it's harder....okay so AR soloed an E10 equivalent....and??

Quote
I am interested in your opinion. My opinion is that of all the types of climbing its only in Bouldering that the brits doing Ok.
Errr what about trad?? Forget the Promise for a mo (why do people need to get hung up on one route that had it's grade tweaked for obvious reasons??). One of the world's very best trad climbers came over here to try Rhapsody. It took him a damn long time, and I get the impression it was ranked up there equal with the other hardest trad routes in the world. Since then, in just a few months, two more trad routes have gone up that are both meant to be significantly harder than Rhapsody - is that not world class??

As for sport we may not have the numbers but given our shitty climate and shitty lime etc etc, having several 9a+s is not that bad is it. There's a few 9bs in the world and 9a+ is definitely world class.

I think we can do better, yes. I think fashion plays a role, yes. I think that weather and resources play a much bigger role and we have to live with that. Is it pissing down with you at the moment?? Cos it is this weekend...

I have a question in return though: Does it matter?? We have a fantastic variety of rock and a fantastic variety of rock climbing apart from big walls. Is the status of how hard we climb and how many hard routes we have that important??
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 08, 2008, 01:14:22 pm
thanks Fiend, I liked your reply,here some from me.
Firstly its very sunny, super blue, very good friction day here, I take your point about the weather in brit land. But surely the hard work of climbing is on the boards and putting the training in.
I personally thought the rhapsody fall was over hyped in the news, I have taken much worse falls, I cant speak for the difficulty, it looks very hard.   
Sorry about not saying 9a+ as regards Mc clure, I like his routes. As for Trotter being a great trad climber, Mc Clure proved better, and probably would not regard himself as the best (overly modest). Britain has great climbing no doubt but so have many countries, and great climbing traditions also, its just the banging on about stuff that seems a bit quiffie. With the fantastic bouldering ability that some people have surely we could just hope for a little more thats all. What about routes like Wogu, Salathea hasnt had a brit ascent. As for the tongue in cheek bit fine, just think Rons ascent was better or purer or bolder (choose your own words). A little tongue in cheek bit from me now, where do the brits come in the bouldering comps and in the leading comps, we have had very few decent placements. Finnaly I thought of the route Ugly as its firstly hard, second fairly long and very intimidating, yet well protected and uses many forms of rockcraft, its not just pulling up on a crimp. Anyway good luck with the weather, Stevie.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: katy on November 10, 2008, 01:37:15 pm
British weather sucks, yet another week of shit weather here in wales. if your lucky  and can afford the petrol then you might make a weather window. if not.....
Mags have to promote climbing because the BMC can't. the teams struggle here because few are supported fully to train. most the girls on the team have a full time job and probably a shit load of responsibilities.
if anyone is in my situation then walls are expensive, boots are expensive, so's petrol and the cost of living. i'd love to be a top class climber but no way in hell am i or most people in this country going to be able to take a significant amount of time off work and large sum of money to travel to spain, with a belayer they can trust to do hard routes.

britain may become a quiet little backwater of climbing.....i'm blaming the weather
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: SA Chris on November 10, 2008, 01:54:55 pm
All good words Fiend apart from the pads bit.

Quote
Is Grit stone especially the shorter type a bit overhyped?
Overhyped in difficulty or in quality?? I think the difficulty of many routes is changing with the padpoint ascents but I don't see any mystery there. These routes were hard before (tricky technical climbing, no gear, bad landings) and now a new protection form comes along that makes them easier. Just like many previous protection improvements. So they're now easier....sobeit.

They may make the routes easier to do, but they are definitely not any easier from an actual climbing point of view, just safer.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 10, 2008, 01:58:34 pm
katy: Word. And the one thing you can fit in most easily with those constraints.....bouldering.

Quote from: stevie
I take your point about the weather in brit land. But surely the hard work of climbing is on the boards and putting the training in.
Yeah that is a fair point, and perhaps the real question:

Why aren't British climbers getting brutally strong and indoor-wall-route-fit inside and then going out and putting up 9bs and more E11s in the brief weather windows we get??

I think there are some answers: Firstly it's much less inspiring being on wood and plastic all the time. Some people can do it to a level where they can compensate for lack of outside mileage to get good enough results, but not everyone. If your training was Siurana every weekend instead of The Foundry 3 nights a week one would probably be putting more effort in and in a better spirit. Secondly as good as indoors is for getting strong, I don't think it trains enough to get fully good outside - particularly for longer sport and trad. Again if people here could train on relevant stuff i.e. routes outside, we might get better at routes outside. As it is, training indoors gets us strong, most applicable for bouldering, so we do well in bouldering.

Quote
Britain has great climbing no doubt but so have many countries, and great climbing traditions also, its just the banging on about stuff that seems a bit quiffie.

Well I think that's just the changing times especially with the gritstone. Gritstone's perculiar nature makes it very susceptible to being made a lot safer/easier with bouldering mats, and is now fitting into the highball culture. Johnny Foreigner is coming over here with a stack of pads and the highball attitude, and yes grit is no longer as special and no longer as hard. But I don't see JF crushing loads of properly long trad routes. The Americans might have downgraded The Promise E8/10 with a couple of pads but the Belgians got spat off on-sighting Strawberries E6/7.
Grit has probably had it's time in terms of pure difficulty and danger, but I think it's still ranked up there in terms of quality anyway...

Quote
A little tongue in cheek bit from me now, where do the brits come in the bouldering comps and in the leading comps, we have had very few decent placements.
We do rubbish AFAIK, especially for a nation that has to spend too much time inside!! Issue - sponsorship and climbing culture, still a nation where climbing is a maverick concept for beardy weirdoes. It's definitely breaking free of that now with the current indoor wall generation so maybe there will be some good results in the future....if the motivation and support is there.

Quote
Finnaly I thought of the route Ugly as its firstly hard, second fairly long and very intimidating, yet well protected and uses many forms of rockcraft, its not just pulling up on a crimp.

There's a lot of stuff like that it would be funny to see people get on....a good challenge ;)

Chris: Sorry, though it would have been obvious I meant overall i.e. adjectival difficulty.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Bonjoy on November 10, 2008, 02:40:10 pm
To a degree when it comes to grit route I think the E grade system means that dangerous routes make the news in a bigger way than hard routes.
For instance Parthian Shot may be E9, but it’s easier than a fair few E7/8s such as Captain Invincible(not Fantastic!), Fagus Sylvatica, Superstition, Screaming Dream, Mother Of  Pearl, Little Women.
For my money there is too much emphasis on big danger rather than big difficulty, which is no surprise when one gets a big news E number and one doesn’t. Perhaps this is another argument for using something other than E grades (even though I argued for them in the other thread). I guess the use of pads (padpoint is a crap term as it suggests pre-practice, rather than ground-up) helps to flag up the true difficulty of grit routes as the people doing it tend to describe the ascents in bouldering grades.

Lastly lets not forget that the standard is to a large degree dictated by the medium. The UK has a very limited amount of potential for hard sport routes. Given it’s tendency to seep I think it’s a miracle (and one very determined and amazing climber) we have 9a+ here at all.
On the grit the gaps are few and far between. Finding lines of the next grade up is almost as hard as doing the climbing! As the rock is fairly vertical, most remaining lines tend to turn out either too blank to climb or no harder than the current hardest routes.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Stu Littlefair on November 10, 2008, 03:54:43 pm

Stevie,

it's an interesting question. I don't really know enough to comment on relative standards in trad climbing etc, but I can comment on the lack (or perceived lack) of top-end sport climbers.

There are many factors for this, motivation, the weather, the lack of rock, the style of climbing, the harsh grades. They all play a part.

Motivation: many folk are just not that bothered, so they won't train endurance, etc. They don't spend time at sport crags.

Weather: maybe the Uk climbers can get strong at the wall, but if the crags are dry for a couple of months a year, what do you expect them to acheive in that time, plus a couple of weeks abroad?

Lack of rock: see motivation.

Climbing style and harsh grades: the british routes are gnarly. They have nasty, conditions-dependent cruxes and are harsh for the grade compared to the continent (on average by about half a grade). Most UK sports climbers have ticked as hard abroad on short trips as they've managed in the UK on their local crags. Go figure? Then you've got people like Markus Bock getting his ass kicked on Evolution, and Iker Pou not doing Mecca, and what did Dave Graham actually tick at the Tor?

So in summary, I think UK climbers are not motivated to obtain the sport prowess we'd regard as world class, but various factors such as conditions etc., conspire to mean that most UK climbers are half a grade to a grade better than their tick-list would suggest, if you see what I mean.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Kingy on November 10, 2008, 04:01:13 pm
 :agree:

Didn't some foreign beast get spanked on Revelations not so long ago? I'm sure Ru could furnish us with details  :P :)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 10, 2008, 05:53:36 pm
About climbing culture and sport motivation vs. trad motivation and traditions etc etc...

Does anyone remember that OTE front cover from a few years back with Bransbubble on the front cover on some new E8 on the Scottish Islands?? Pumped, gurning, gripped, proper old skool helmet on, old skool scruffy clothes, grey rock, grey weather, out pioneering in the arse end of some windswept Scottish nowhere - I thought it was brilliant. Showed all the uncoolness of proper British trad in all it's glory.

But, compare that to some typical Euro-lime scene, overhanging pocketed jug pulling, nice shiney bolts, evening sun blazing on some tanned hunk or hunkette, just one of many F8cs on a cliff of 8cs where it's sunny 364 days a year and there's a hundred locals who can burn you off and they're just the chicks....all the glamour and the glitz....

We still don't have that vibe yet of climbing being cool, and who knows whether we as a culture want it....?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jaspersharpe on November 10, 2008, 06:03:45 pm
Yeah the weather certainly plays a part in that. Even at a bouldering (rather than trad) level the attitude of getting out there in shite weather, hoping that something will be dry against all the odds. Drying holds with rags, getting covered in mud when you fall off. The fact that you've had a go rather than just going to the wall and it's a good feeling to have tried. It's a world away from the sport climbing idyll but it's part of what most of us love about climbing. I'm not sure what effect this has on us getting good but it certainly reduces the "coolness" factor you describe.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on November 10, 2008, 06:08:46 pm
About climbing culture and sport motivation vs. trad motivation and traditions etc etc...

Does anyone remember that OTE front cover from a few years back with Bransbubble on the front cover on some new E8 on the Scottish Islands?? Pumped, gurning, gripped, proper old skool helmet on, old skool scruffy clothes, grey rock, grey weather, out pioneering in the arse end of some windswept Scottish nowhere - I thought it was brilliant. Showed all the uncoolness of proper British trad in all it's glory.

But, compare that to some typical Euro-lime scene, overhanging pocketed jug pulling, nice shiney bolts, evening sun blazing on some tanned hunk or hunkette, just one of many F8cs on a cliff of 8cs where it's sunny 364 days a year and there's a hundred locals who can burn you off and they're just the chicks....all the glamour and the glitz....

Yep I remeber that particular issue.  An excellent report it was topo.  I find it far more inspiring than pics of people pulling on steep limestone, but thats because its more relevant to me (hardly ever clip bolts, mainly 'cause I'm weeeaaaak), but importantly...

We still don't have that vibe yet of climbing being cool, and who knows whether we I as an culture individual want it....?

Theres room for both images though, those who want to be "cool" will do so, those who want to go to the arse end of some windswept Scottish nowhere will do so.  Its about what individuals want, not what a culture want.  After all 'culture' doesn't have a mind to decide what it wants, its the individuals who constitute it who decide for themselves (albeit some of whom will be heavily influenced by the media, btw is there anyone here who works in marketing, kill yourselves, you are satans little spawn...).  I'm sure this is what you meant thoug  ;)

Why do things get polarised into basically Bad (shit) or Good (not shit)?  Theres a whole spectrum of abilities, and this is ultimately asking where do people who were born/reside in one part of the world fit in on that scale, and is it higher than some arbitrary and continually moving level of goodness?

I'm squarely with Mr at work (if I've remembered correctly) and climb because I enjoy it, not because I aspire to be good (which is just as well  :lol: )
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 10, 2008, 06:18:19 pm
Theres room for both images though, those who want to be "cool" will do so, those who want to go to the arse end of some windswept Scottish nowhere will do so.  Its about what individuals want, not what a culture want.  After all 'culture' doesn't have a mind to decide what it wants, its the individuals who constitute it who decide for themselves (albeit some of whom will be heavily influenced by the media, btw is there anyone here who works in marketing, kill yourselves, you are satans little spawn...).  I'm sure this is what you meant thoug  ;)

No it's not the point I was making. I was making a point about the general climbing culture, with this idea in mind: The Europeans and Americans seem to have a culture where climbing is cool, popular, promoted, and glamorous. Promoted in schools, big in media, more sponsorship, plentiful competitions, pushing standards is de-rigeur. This enables standards in sport climbing in particular to get pushed more easily - people are more encouraged that way. I think we have less of that culture in the UK and more of the hoary old adventure big yellow helmet culture. Less promotion, less sponsorship, less encouragement to progress and be a big rock star. So it's harder.

I personally prefer the latter culture but this isn't about my preferences, it's about what Stevie's saying about the sport - is Britain really any good?? If not why not?? And should it be made any good?? Or maybe it doesn't matter??
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on November 10, 2008, 08:45:58 pm
Theres room for both images though, those who want to be "cool" will do so, those who want to go to the arse end of some windswept Scottish nowhere will do so.  Its about what individuals want, not what a culture want.  After all 'culture' doesn't have a mind to decide what it wants, its the individuals who constitute it who decide for themselves (albeit some of whom will be heavily influenced by the media, btw is there anyone here who works in marketing, kill yourselves, you are satans little spawn...).  I'm sure this is what you meant thoug  ;)

No it's not the point I was making. I was making a point about the general climbing culture, with this idea in mind: The Europeans and Americans seem to have a culture where climbing is cool, popular, promoted, and glamorous. Promoted in schools, big in media, more sponsorship, plentiful competitions, pushing standards is de-rigeur. This enables standards in sport climbing in particular to get pushed more easily - people are more encouraged that way. I think we have less of that culture in the UK and more of the hoary old adventure big yellow helmet culture. Less promotion, less sponsorship, less encouragement to progress and be a big rock star. So it's harder.

Apologies Fiendy, my mis-interpretation, wasn't trying to put words in your mouth, although I stand by my assertion that a culture can't desire to be a certain way, its something thats is derived from the desires of individuals within  (a subset of) society.  Those with similar desires/aims will tend to socialise together to re-inforce that image.


Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Bonjoy on November 11, 2008, 09:10:52 am


No it's not the point I was making. I was making a point about the general climbing culture, with this idea in mind: The Europeans and Americans seem to have a culture where climbing is cool, popular, promoted, and glamorous. Promoted in schools, big in media, more sponsorship, plentiful competitions, pushing standards is de-rigeur. This enables standards in sport climbing in particular to get pushed more easily - people are more encouraged that way. I think we have less of that culture in the UK and more of the hoary old adventure big yellow helmet culture. Less promotion, less sponsorship, less encouragement to progress and be a big rock star. So it's harder.



Where is this Europe of which you speak? Europe is a big place made of lots of very different countries whose styles of climbing and attitude towards it are many and various. Just because English people are mostly only interested in a certain style (sunny limestone with bolts) doesn’t mean that this is all or even most of what the locals do. Every country I’ve been to there has a load of trad/adventure climbing, it’s just that Rockfax don’t write guide to these crags.
Assuming Spain typifies this stereotype you’re constructing, I’d have to disagree with the assessment. Climbing is not highly regarded by the general media or the public, in fact they seem to be viewed as the lowest of the low. I can’t imagine it’s encouraged at school to even the extent it is here. The guidebooks are rubbish, presumably because they don’t have a strong national body promoting the sport and because there is little money in it. Are dogs, mullets and dreadlocks cool/glamorous, that’s the main scene I came across? Most climbers I met seemed much more skint than the average climber here. I met many strong climbers, none were paid to climb. I didn’t see any evidence of  competitions at all. The sport climbers are good because they have good crags and nice weather.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 11, 2008, 09:25:56 am
I meant France and America as well. It's just my perception from the media and just trying to find some reasons behind the issues Stevie is raising. As for the type of climbing I do think Europe has a much higher proportion of sport climbing than we do??
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on November 11, 2008, 09:36:48 am
As for the type of climbing I do think Europe has a much higher proportion of sport climbing than we do??


Surely thats simply a function of the type of rock i.e. more limestone, although admittedly other types of rock do get bolted.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: 220bpm on November 11, 2008, 02:11:51 pm
About climbing culture and sport motivation vs. trad motivation and traditions etc etc...

Does anyone remember that OTE front cover from a few years back with Bransbubble on the front cover on some new E8 on the Scottish Islands?? Pumped, gurning, gripped, proper old skool helmet on, old skool scruffy clothes, grey rock, grey weather, out pioneering in the arse end of some windswept Scottish nowhere - I thought it was brilliant. Showed all the uncoolness of proper British trad in all it's glory.


Indeed, twas a classic of its kind. I think it was on the Sgurr of Eigg, right up the nose freeing an old aid line.

Hardcore  :bow:

We do pretty well on this island, working with what we have. Keep the faith.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 11, 2008, 03:15:17 pm
Kingy, the  etranger guy who got spanked on Revelations, you obviously dont mean the sweet Antoin.e;;;
Bonjoy good points about the dangerous grit routes getting perhaps to much press, but half of them arnt even dangerous, and with real 9a ability alot of the danger would evaporate.
Stu I know the lime is really hard, but its pretty hard (stiffly graded ) in other places to. I really like the big hard sport routes and some how think of them as the touch stone of climbing, they arnt dangerous, they arnt loose, they just require fitness, power, skill and determination, they are in short for everybody. Since the retirement of Ben I have always been ashamed of Brits on bolts, thank god for steve. I shout at my mates in wales to get serious, with their bouldering ability, 8c+/ 9a might be on the cards fairly quickly, you probably know people all over britain who might do well, its such a shame. Messing around on sitdown starts when you could swagger to the bottom of the Rambla and have a chance of posting it to mummy is short changing yourself.
Katy, I wanted to go to a wall in britain the other day and didnt, to expensive for me. The british team still seem to produce some good younguns and then something goes wrong, inspiration , hard training and reward would seem to be called for.
To everybody, years ago a couple of the french team (when they were tops) were joking with me, and said its easy to be strong in britain cos the weather is shit. Chabot (13 international titles) came from Rheims hardly good weather and a really long way from any climbing apart from font. If only Malc had won, instead of being nobbled  by that Italian ref, maybe we would be more interested in winning. Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Kingy on November 11, 2008, 04:24:39 pm
Kingy, the  etranger guy who got spanked on Revelations, you obviously dont mean the sweet Antoin.e;;;

Oh no there was another wad, who shall remain nameless cos I have forgotten who he is  ::), who left empty handed relatively recently. Just proving what a tricky tick for 8a+, ahem....8b, this climb is.  ;D
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Bonjoy on November 11, 2008, 04:30:18 pm
  :) I hope this puts an end to people giving Rev 8a+, it's clearly 8b.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Kingy on November 11, 2008, 04:33:13 pm
  :) I hope this puts an end to people giving Rev 8a+, it's clearly 8b.

Only if Magnetic gets 8a+....  :whistle:
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Three Nine on November 11, 2008, 04:51:59 pm

Stu I know the lime is really hard, but its pretty hard (stiffly graded ) in other places to. I really like the big hard sport routes and some how think of them as the touch stone of climbing, they arnt dangerous, they arnt loose, they just require fitness, power, skill and determination, they are in short for everybody. Since the retirement of Ben I have always been ashamed of Brits on bolts, thank god for steve. I shout at my mates in wales to get serious, with their bouldering ability, 8c+/ 9a might be on the cards fairly quickly, you probably know people all over britain who might do well, its such a shame. Messing around on sitdown starts when you could swagger to the bottom of the Rambla and have a chance of posting it to mummy is short changing yourself.


i think this is a bit silly. i personally would rather do la rambla than one of gaskins hard unrepeated sit starts, but it has no greater value really. you seem to have this idea that people should be doing all sorts of things, but really if people are excited about sit down starts on scrappy bits of rock, or being strong for its own sake, or training for the sake of training, then that's really up to them. there's nothing noble about climbing as far as i can see, sticking your neck out on something isn't done for the benefit of british climbing, but for your own personal satisfaction. similarly hard redpointing (at any grade - i mean hard for a particular individual) is always really hard work and there's nothing that says that people should be doing it. i generally clip bolts and am often being told that i should be onsighting e6s, because i've onsighted at a certain grade on sports, but what if i just dont want to. outside of comps why should people care if the frenchies are better than us at something?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: T_B on November 11, 2008, 05:25:56 pm
I can think of one talented Brit youngster - Tom Bolger - who has gone to live in Spain cos the weather's so sh*t here and there aren't many F8bs for him to try and on-sight. Britain has always been very insular looking so I suspect he's the exception and most yoofs will maintain their focus on the sit down starts.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Ru on November 11, 2008, 05:50:32 pm
Stu I know the lime is really hard, but its pretty hard (stiffly graded ) in other places to.

The lime in this country isn't just stiffly graded, it's also conditions dependent, awkward, tweaky and wet 60% of the year. Worse still, the wet periods often coincide with the good conditions.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on November 11, 2008, 05:53:47 pm
Worse still, the wet periods often coincide with the good conditions.

Sounds like a bit of an oxymoron to me!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 11, 2008, 07:33:43 pm
hello 39, if you dont want to fine, if you are happy fine. I just  gave some thoughts and opinions. If people are happy doing little things fine, however it strikes me  that  with not an impossible amount of work we could have many more good sports climbers. When I see a good boulderer putting alot of effort pulling on condition dependent rock in damp air in damp britain on an ugly low boulder, I personaly wish they were doing something better, no big deal. France is having less luck with their competiters(less money), in  Italy the sport climbing scene is on the decline( no money apparently). The original thread is (was) about wether standards are on the decline or instep with bouldering standards. I am not trying to piss anybody off. Yes and maybe I am wierd, my pride is somehow offended that no brits have done Salathea (or that I cant spell), maybe I,ll see a shrink. Have any of you been to Oliana, a crag in spain, I,ll try and put a few photos up for you, makes me wish I could climb. regards Stevie.Ps re revelations does that mean Squak was an 8b climber, well done.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 11, 2008, 08:21:24 pm
I shout at my mates in wales to get serious, with their bouldering ability, 8c+/ 9a might be on the cards fairly quickly, you probably know people all over britain who might do well, its such a shame. Messing around on sitdown starts when you could swagger to the bottom of the Rambla and have a chance of posting it to mummy is short changing yourself.
The main point being that the sitdown starts are there in Wales and La Rambla errrr....isn't. And what can the wads do to train for the Rambla so they can go over and crush it?? UK Limestone of course....thus see Ru's post a few up.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Percy B on November 11, 2008, 08:27:06 pm
Revelations can only be 8a+ cos Squawk did it, and Monumental Armblaster can only be 8a+ cos Vickers flashed it, and so on and so on! One of the things I disliked about the old Peak scene - if you weren't in with the in crowd you couldn't possibly be any good...

Anyway, I think (generalising grossly) that us Brits are in serious danger of getting left behind as regards the top standards in rock climbing. Certainly the current Yanky grit rampage proves the point that if you can boulder Font 8b+ and you have big enough knackers, then most of the 'Hard Grit' era testpieces are no longer a big deal - on-sightable, ground-upable, or laughably overgraded (KJ's assessment of End of the affair - E6?!?! and probably quite right too!)
The standards of climbing I see from the top climbers in the world cup comps I set for is quite simply astronomical, and we are slowly letting the cutting edge slip away from us. This is most obvious in difficulty comps, where there is nobody in the UK who could get close at the moment (not even Ste Mac, I'm afraid). To get into a final at world cup level these days you have to able to on-sight 8b+, and the winners are capable of on-sighting 8c+. There ain't any Brits operating at this level as far as I'm aware at the moment. All is not lost, but I can sense a stagnation of standards due to lack of motivation, inspiration and remuneration by those at the cutting edge of the sport, and I hope that we can get a grip again before its too late.
In order for a Brit to hit the headlines in foreign mags nowadays we either have to climb stupidly dangerous hard trad routes (only realy James P and Dave Mc operating at this level though) or its Steve Mac winning another Roctrip comp by climbing 20 8a+'s in an hour.... We don't really have any other sport climbers or boulderers making waves overseas from their new hard problems or routes (apart from Ty, but he's buggered off and left the UK for the good life)! I'm sure that maybe there are some young spunkers about to burst onto the international scene, but I am often hopelessly optemistic too.
I'd volunteer to push British standards forward myself, but I'm quite busy and I've got a note from my Mum explaining why I can't do standard raising this year due to a nasty verucca...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on November 11, 2008, 11:40:51 pm
Maybe I'm missing something, but what would having world-class, cutting edge British climbers actually achieve?

Beyond some sort of tribalistic sense of national pride (which personally I don't subscibe to, we're all human beings after all) what would be different if there were  top-end brit climbers?

They'd be able to climb hard and have the sponsorship they need, making it a potentially viable "career choice" for a few youngsters?

Entice Johnny  Foreigner over to try their latest test-piece, raising the "profile of UK climbing" in the eyes of foreigners which in turn would lead to more sponsorship and more of the above?

Personally I find it inspiring when someone climbs something hard anywhere in the world, irrespective of their nationality or where the climb is located.  Why try and turn achievements into an "Us (Brits) v's them/the rest of the world" type enquiry, what is the point of this line of questioning?  Aren't you yourself an ex-pat living abroad (for a number of years) Stevie?  Your achievements are outstanding for what you have done, not the country you were born in or you happened to done your climbs in (to my mind at least).
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 12, 2008, 08:46:45 am
hello slackline, I am not really at all nationalistic ,am fairly tribal though. I surport France in rugby, cos I much prefer their game and, plus I could get seriously mangled around here by cheering for the enemy. What would it achieve having top climbers from britain, actually alot. Percy B said it very well in his post and had more balls than me. The kids who come up, wouldnt give up. Some people would get enough money to live and climb their dreams, and alot more people who I know who live off climbing would also benifit, so yes  their is actually something to be said for it. Percy Bs post is worth reading and maybe some of it should be written in big letters in a mag. If you see one of the greats climbing now, you might realize, that yes they might be able to climb Fr 9b+, and have a laugh on it to. They can boulder but use it as a tool. 
Fiend there are at least two lads in wales who could do the Rambla, they have no excuses, they have the facilities but they lac the will. Worse they would have to work a little, much easier to go bouldering. Nice one Percy owe you a pint Stevie.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Bonjoy on November 12, 2008, 09:31:03 am
As stated by a few on here it seems the only way for a Brit to get truly world class is to live abroad (eg Tyler). So what does that prove? Nothing more than what we already know, that a motivated climber will flourish where the weather and rock are conducive, i.e. not Britain. Ok, you could train to do the Rambla in the UK, it would be hard and rather pointlessly dull, why not move to Spain for a bit instead, which would be more effective and more fun.
Besides, what is national pride all about anyway? Proof that British genes are the best? Proof that British climbing is the best/hardest? Proof that the British try hardest? We have the same genes as everyone else, we don’t have better/harder climbing than the rest of the world and we don’t try any harder than anywhere else, why should we be top of the pile?
The one thing we could be good at is comps I guess. Unfortunately most Brit climbers (myself included) are largely disinterested in comps, this can’t help motivate the potential talent.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Joepicalli on November 12, 2008, 09:38:29 am
Parthian Shot looks like it still needs a good ascent to me(better or perfect) and is it really a hard route when you consider something like Shaune Miles route Captain Fantastic?
When you say it needs a good ascent I would have thought that Neil Bentley's effort (placing the gear on the lead after practicing the route) counts as a "good" ascent, not a "perfect" one but a workperson like work-and-send effort.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: travs on November 12, 2008, 09:50:08 am
Rock climbing is no different from any other sport in that any given country and group of individuals cannot be at the top of a given sport for ever. It is the nature of each group training on their own and not in one mass group that causes countries to leap frog each other in 'world dominance'. Parallels are easily drawn from other sports such as football, rugby, tennis and indeed cycling. Cycling is quite interesting in that team GB are currently dominating the world in track events at all competitions including the Olympics, World Champoinships and the World Cup tour. Now this wasn't always the case nor will it be the case in say 5 years time but does this make the other cyclists competing shite? Of course it doesn't. I bet they train just as hard the GB  cyclists but training is only one facet of the overall package. And so we have GB rock climbers, there was a time where we enjoyed dominance in both competitions and rock routes with the likes of Nadin and Moffet leading from the front but that time passed and now the Spanish and Americans are pushing standards forward but it doesn't make everybody else shite and I suspect in 5 years time it will be the turn of another coutry to be the star performers. I certainly wouldn't assume it won't be GB climbers and instead of telling all our talented climbers thet they are shite we should instead be looking at how the Spanish got to where they are so that we can get to that point ourselves and then move on to another level - just as the GB cyclists did!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jaspersharpe on November 12, 2008, 09:58:34 am
Once again common sense from Mr T.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Kingy on November 12, 2008, 10:00:37 am
This discussion brings to mind a period in US climbing history in the early 90's when the American males were performed abyssmally on the international stage, when Jibe came over and waltzed up Just Do it at a time when no yank had yet climbed 8c. Plus there was only Jim Karn challenging in the comps. It prompted Dave Pegg to write an article in Climbing Mag called "Why do we Suck" regarding American male climbing. Then 7 years down the track, Sharma started dominating international climbing and Graham showed up to back him up. This was quite a turn around and I agree with Travs that these things go in cycles, no need for sackcloth and ashes in the low periods.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: dave on November 12, 2008, 10:03:15 am
Once again common sense from Mr T.

i suspected the main problem is british climbers "ain't gettin on no plane, fool".
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on November 12, 2008, 10:28:01 am
Thanks for the reply Stevie.

I had read Percy's post and have re-read it again, and I've acknowledged that climbing hard leads to sponsorship and would make it viable for some as a career.  But take out any reference to Brits or foreigners from Percy's post and it simply reads that there is a normal distribution of climbers ability and if you impose nationality on that then the brits aren't in the tail end.  Theres nothing unusual or surprising about this, its going to change all the time.  A couple of decades ago there will have been brits in that very tail end (viz. Moffatt, Moon, Nadin, Vickers all doing well in comps and climbing hard).  Give it a few years and things might have shifted.  Its all swings and roundabouts and will continually change.

It doesn't stop people climbing and living in the UK from being inspired by the achievements of others who climb and live in other countries.  Perhaps its down to the UK's climbing media focusing mainly on UK climbing/climbers, perhaps more column inches should be given to the scene in other countries in the UK press so that up and coming youngsters can see whats going on at the top end, be inspired, not give up, train and climb harder, etc. etc..  For all their "sins" UKC do seem to have a lot of reports about happenings in other countries (although perhaps a bit biased to the US).

Perhaps the recent attention some UK test-pieces have had (Trotter coming over to climb Rhapsody; current maelstrom of US wads crushing on the Grit) is a reflection of this in their countries.  UK climbs and climbing has been getting more exposure in their press, so they've decided to come and check it out?  Reverse the situation and some of the top-end boulderers here might head abroad and we'd hear about them crushing problems as Jerry did years ago.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on November 12, 2008, 10:32:07 am
Beaten to it by Travs.

Once again common sense from Mr T.

i suspected the main problem is british climbers "ain't gettin on no plane, fool".

 :lol: :lol:
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 12, 2008, 10:40:13 am
What Bonjoy Travs and Dave said. Good posts.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 12, 2008, 11:49:14 am
Its raining, snowing. So you lot basically are saying, yep the brits are very poor at comps but it doesnt matter, because we dont have the weather or the facilities.  And there is no need to put on the sack cloth. You are also saying yep some of our trad routes are over graded and over hyped but that doesnt matter either, because the guys who have recently done them are really good. Sport climbing,  yep we are adrift, you seem to say. We are alright at bouldering, as we have how many 8c boulderers? I have realized that I seem to have a completly out of fashion embarassment at our low standing, and I am trying to put that down to the indoctrination I suffered at school and my extreme age. Thanks for taking part in a polite and interesting thread. ps.Well done Adam on Big bus stop, and Pete on Pool. Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Bonjoy on November 12, 2008, 01:00:50 pm
Perhaps people on here feel that the upper level of British climbing is well and truly out of their hands, so faced with the choice of gnashing and wailling, or accepting it with aplomb, they opt for the less painful option.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: travs on November 12, 2008, 01:32:06 pm
No I think what we are saying is... Take the 100m, at the moment the 2 best sprinters in the world are Jamaican and they are miles ahead of everybody else. Our best sprinters are clocking bang on 10sec whilst the Jamaicans are running 9.74, so what does that tell us? Does it mean the GB sprinters are shite? Does it mean the Jamaican sprinters train harder? Well the answer is probably no, what it means is that Jamaica currently happen to have the 2 most gifted sprinters the world has ever seen and in  5 years time we may well have some Americans or indeed GB atheletes who come along and so what the Jamaicans are doing now, which is raise the bar by a considerable level. It's very difficult to disseminate natural ability from hard graft but my suspision is that these American climbers are truly gifted and so the reality is that they will always be one step ahead of their peers no matter how much training everbody does, we will just have to wait for our own naturally gifted climbers to emerge.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 12, 2008, 01:40:49 pm
we will just have to wait for our own naturally gifted climbers to emerge.
....from their cellars, tear Lancashire lime bouldering to pieces, and the disappear again...

Hmmmm.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: cowboyhat on November 12, 2008, 01:44:24 pm
What Travs said about cycles etc, we shall rise forth again! etc

Finance plays a huge part in this and the wider debate about E8-E12's and their relative difficulty.

The weather is shit, but conditions aren't perfect everywhere all the time, hence why Chris and Dave have been international hobo's for five years or so. Tyler and Daniel Woods are beginning to explore that idea too. What does this lifestyle require most?  Money. (I'm sure a read recently Fred Nicole has been doing this for little money but is reveared most here in the UK, What does that say?)

Look at Kevin Jorgs sponsors and his professional website. Despite grabbing headlines home and abroad Dave McLeod sells bespoke shortbread as a sideline!

The kids are alright.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: katy on November 15, 2008, 12:12:29 pm

Katy, I wanted to go to a wall in britain the other day and didnt, to expensive for me. The british team still seem to produce some good younguns and then something goes wrong, inspiration , hard training and reward would seem to be called for.


if you have any suggestions for inspiration, there is a girl just started in wales who could be world class if she can stick with it.....

young kids growing into well rounded adults..., well ya get bored quick with training. when you have a bit more freedom you tend to get drunk than go to the wall, your not treated like an athlete, your body develops injurys which are mis-treated or not treated. why climb when it hurts?

then often the net and the wicked whispers mean you don't want to publicly try something for not being seen as lying, or someone saying that 'i did it when i was 6 with my eyes closed' and having your efforts belittled. if your not european champion or top of your game then its not a good effort. then where's the incentive to try? why try something if your going to get a public slating?

there's a lot of bull in british climbing. partly, coz if your not in the 'in' crowd then you won't be spoken about (except in derogative tones) and then we over-hype things we probably shouldn't....


Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 15, 2008, 04:23:06 pm
hello katy, well you said alot didnt you. I whish I could help you in a concrete way but I cant. Some times climbing doesnt work out that well for any of us. Climbing has been the single most important thing at times for me and has got me throught some very dark patches, at the moment it gives me enormous joy, and I am not going to let go of that for any one or anything. Once along time ago a little girl who was 15 was climbing really well  and loved it, she had incredible potential and sometimes would out climb me. She was as good as another girl in France who later took many titles in comps, once  the  french girl took the leading and the bouldering title, the girl in wales didnot get the surport she needed, but she still loves climbing to this day, her name is Katie as well. You have to try hard at climbing just as you have to try very hard at living, in the end if you dont get the help you need, you have to dig a bit deeper. Anyway good luck and dont be too down, when I see youngsters climbing and trying hard it inspires me.  Oh and dont worry about being in the in crowd, I never have been.Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Moo on November 15, 2008, 04:34:00 pm
excuse me while i fetch my tiny violin
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: katy on November 15, 2008, 05:09:48 pm
Hello Mr Haston,

Well to be honest everything i wrote was about other people, but i can see how ya might assume it was about me. yup i'm looking atthings from a girls point of view, but one talented friend had way too much pressure and a pretty serious injury which may never clear up.
and then, living in a tiny community its easy to feel like other peoples efforts aren't spoken about because they aren't in vogue, anyone heard of ioan doyle, dan mcmanus, or a 14year old lad called callum who onsighted a bunch of e6's this year?you weren't in vogue but you are incredibly outspoken and therefore get attention. maybe we need proper reporters in mags who write about everyone not just the guys they belay?

britain has talent which we waste
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: n_man on November 15, 2008, 09:42:23 pm

britain has talent which we waste

In spades and not just at climbing. If it isn't football it isn't sport. Or thats what it seems like from the media.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on November 15, 2008, 09:53:32 pm
The british team still seem to produce some good younguns and then something goes wrong, inspiration , hard training and reward would seem to be called for.

I'd question this slightly, having just witnessed a team training session in the flesh I'm pretty certain that the success and performance of everyone involved is down to their own efforts and nothing else.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: shark on November 16, 2008, 12:35:34 am
Quote
then often the net and the wicked whispers mean you don't want to publicly try something for not being seen as lying, or someone saying that 'i did it when i was 6 with my eyes closed' and having your efforts belittled. if your not european champion or top of your game then its not a good effort. then where's the incentive to try? why try something if your going to get a public slating?


Name a sport that doesnt have detractors. The French press accused Lance Armstrong of having a drug advantage because he went through chemotherapy. If the incentive to try is purely for recognition and plaudits rather than internally driven then, yes, you are on a hiding to nothing if you are anything other than the best, which most aren't. Alternatively the competitive might think - I'll show the fuckers.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 16, 2008, 08:22:23 am
Thanks katy, sorry I got the wrong end of the stick. There are some good people working with the kids in North wales, small comunities with lots of bad and not much to do, isnt a good thing for kids but at least they live in one of the most fantastic places in britain, in that they are lucky. Kids inspire me a lot sometimes, the Catrell when they were nippers really gave me a kick.Stay positive and good luck, Stevie.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Houdini on November 16, 2008, 08:29:53 am
... the Catrell when they were nippers really gave me a kick ...

Damn rodents.  Sounds savage; hope you disinfected the region afterwards.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Tommy on November 17, 2008, 07:42:30 am

and then, living in a tiny community its easy to feel like other peoples efforts aren't spoken about because they aren't in vogue, anyone heard of ioan doyle, dan mcmanus, or a 14year old lad called callum who onsighted a bunch of e6's this year?you weren't in vogue but you are incredibly outspoken and therefore get attention. maybe we need proper reporters in mags who write about everyone not just the guys they belay?

britain has talent which we waste

Hi Katy, if it makes any difference I know about the achievements of both Callum and Ioan. Neither surprise me of their achievements as they're both so psyched! Ioan might even have got into one of the british teams if he didn't insist on turning round and waving at his mum every 30 secs on his qualifiers!

I hope they keep it up and keep pushing.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Pantontino on November 17, 2008, 01:22:37 pm
and then, living in a tiny community its easy to feel like other peoples efforts aren't spoken about because they aren't in vogue, anyone heard of ioan doyle, dan mcmanus, or a 14year old lad called callum who onsighted a bunch of e6's this year?you weren't in vogue but you are incredibly outspoken and therefore get attention. maybe we need proper reporters in mags who write about everyone not just the guys they belay?

Presumably this last point is a dig at me (and my N Wales scene reports for Climber mag)? For the record, I spend a lot of time reporting what Caff and Pete, Neil Dickson, Jack Geldard etc do in North Wales simply because they are climbing harder than anybody else. Others such as Jon Ratcliffe, Ian Lloyd-Jones get coverage because they are prolific new routers.

If you're not doing significant first ascents, climbing E7 ground up/on sight or doing hard headpoints you are unlikely to get coverage from any magazine. Ioan always contacts me if he does any significant bouldering ascents, are there other route ascents that he hasn't mentioned?

As for the N Wales scene being cliquey or exclusive - I don't get this at all. Things are a lot friendlier and cohesive here than any other British climbing scene I've encountered.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Monolith on November 17, 2008, 01:43:42 pm
As for the N Wales scene being cliquey or exclusive - I don't get this at all. Things are a lot friendlier and cohesive here than any other British climbing scene I've encountered.

Seconded.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: katy on November 17, 2008, 03:48:07 pm
and then, living in a tiny community its easy to feel like other peoples efforts aren't spoken about because they aren't in vogue, anyone heard of ioan doyle, dan mcmanus, or a 14year old lad called callum who onsighted a bunch of e6's this year?you weren't in vogue but you are incredibly outspoken and therefore get attention. maybe we need proper reporters in mags who write about everyone not just the guys they belay?


If you're not doing significant first ascents, climbing E7 ground up/on sight or doing hard headpoints you are unlikely to get coverage from any magazine. Ioan always contacts me if he does any significant bouldering ascents, are there other route ascents that he hasn't mentioned?



Not as much of a dig at you but others who do reporting too. Ioan did his first e7 onsight this year and hard e6's onsight at 14 is definately worth a mention.

And the scene can be cliquey, although i wasn't saying necessarily that. But if your in 'fashion' from a reporting sense then your efforts are worth more than others. Or that how it seems to the mortals.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on November 17, 2008, 03:52:58 pm
I think its been pointed out before; people will get the coverage they seek. If people don't tell people what they've done then its likely that nobody will hear of it.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Monolith on November 17, 2008, 04:15:17 pm
Bump.

I'm far more intrigued to hear about modest secret beasts than I am interested in seeing the same old staple crop of individuals in the magazines. Isn't that why we all revere the G so much?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jaspersharpe on November 17, 2008, 04:17:43 pm
No that's because he climbed harder stuff than anyone else. I agree though.

Paul is spot on.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: katy on November 17, 2008, 04:34:16 pm
Ah I'm digging a hole for myself........

So far i know Ioans headpoints have been ignored. What should he do?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Pantontino on November 17, 2008, 04:35:09 pm
Not as much of a dig at you but others who do reporting too. Ioan did his first e7 onsight this year and hard e6's onsight at 14 is definately worth a mention.

And the scene can be cliquey, although I wasn't saying necessarily that. But if your in 'fashion' from a reporting sense then your efforts are worth more than others. Or that how it seems to the mortals.

Onsighting A Wreath of Deadly Nightshade is a good effort, but opinion is divided to whether it is E7. It's gone in the new guide as a split grade E6/7. 

Headpointing Gravediggers (F7c R or 'E7') and Totally Wired 9 (F7b+ R/X or 'E8') - also good efforts, but Ioan should be letting people like me (and Jack Geldard) know. (I only knew about the former, and didn't view it as being that newsworthy.)

I understand Callum onsighted The Cad and Rainbow of Recalcitrance - a fine effort at that age!

As for the in 'fashion' comment, I think that is unwarranted. The only reason people like Pete, Caff get talked about so much is because they are climbing so well. Pete seems to be going from strength to strength. Never mind the routes, he's done 1 Font 8a and 2 Font 8a+s in the last few weeks (and that's not Swiss holiday ticks, these are hardcore Welsh problems!).

Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 17, 2008, 04:41:04 pm
So far i know Ioans headpoints have been ignored. What should he do?
Give up headpointing obviously. I'm not sure there's a small enough violin to capture my concern about someone not being recognised for headpointing sub-cutting edge routes, even as a kid.

The onsighting on the other hand, a good effort. That must be pushing some limits at his age. Although are there any hard E6s in Wales apart from Strawberries ;)

P.S. Yes I've heard of Ioan before, several times, on UKC. The other two names you mentioned are vaguely familiar too.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: katy on November 17, 2008, 04:47:15 pm
Not as much of a dig at you but others who do reporting too. Ioan did his first e7 onsight this year and hard e6's onsight at 14 is definately worth a mention.

And the scene can be cliquey, although I wasn't saying necessarily that. But if your in 'fashion' from a reporting sense then your efforts are worth more than others. Or that how it seems to the mortals.

Onsighting A Wreath of Deadly Nightshade is a good effort, but opinion is divided to whether it is E7. It's gone in the new guide as a split grade E6/7. 

Headpointing Gravediggers (F7c R or 'E7') and Totally Wired 9 (F7b+ R/X or 'E8') - also good efforts, but Ioan should be letting people like me (and Jack Geldard) know. (I only knew about the former, and didn't view it as being that newsworthy.)

I understand Callum onsighted The Cad and Rainbow of Recalcitrance - a fine effort at that age!

As for the in 'fashion' comment, I think that is unwarranted. The only reason people like Pete, Caff get talked about so much is because they are climbing so well. Pete seems to be going from strength to strength. Never mind the routes, he's done 1 Font 8a and 2 Font 8a+s in the last few weeks (and that's not Swiss holiday ticks, these are hardcore Welsh problems!).



I'm definately not having a go at caff or pete. they earn every route, boulder they do and its awesome what they do.

But if you know what routes iow's done, and callum, why no mention of them?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Pantontino on November 17, 2008, 04:48:03 pm
Although are there any hard E6s in Wales apart from Strawberries ;)

Beginner's Mind is a pretty tricky E6 - I seem to recall it being a popular 'E8' headpoint at one point. ;)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: butters on November 17, 2008, 04:59:10 pm

But if you know what routes iow's done, and callum, why no mention of them?


Because they are fine efforts but not newsworthy is what I gleaned from Pantontino's reply but maybe am I missing something here?

bluebrad
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Pantontino on November 17, 2008, 04:59:19 pm
I'm definately not having a go at caff or pete. they earn every route, boulder they do and its awesome what they do.

But if you know what routes iow's done, and callum, why no mention of them?

I didn't know about Callum's E6s until recently, same goes for Ioan's hp of Totally Wired 9. They both deserve a mention, however a ground up ascent of the latter would be significantly more newsworthy. Not that I'm advocating such a thing - I belayed Tim on the first ascent of this and am all to aware of the potential consequences of failure, should the gear rip. I guess that is why it has a mooted E8 grade for the ground up ascent.

I probably wouldn't have reported an onsight of A Wreath..., unless in passing after reference to something more significant.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: T_B on November 17, 2008, 05:15:30 pm
Although are there any hard E6s in Wales apart from Strawberries ;)

Beginner's Mind is a pretty tricky E6 - I seem to recall it being a popular 'E8' headpoint at one point. ;)

You have beginners mind at E7 in this month's column... ;)

I can see reading about the Robbins on-sighting the glue machine - a bog standard E6 - might get Katy and her young friends bristling. This is, after all, a fairly impressive tick list for the year by anyone's standards:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/showlog.html?id=27980 (http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/showlog.html?id=27980)

BTW for the nu guidebook - I think it's TheThreacherous Underfoot not, A Treacherous Underfoot. I.e. like an animal!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: katy on November 17, 2008, 05:19:01 pm
The point is......(take deep breath)

To be competitive on a world scale, you need money from sponsers to take long trips to work things. they need to be able to have you reported enough to make this viable therefore you need lots of shiny pictures and articles. which is where you need nice people to take photo's of you and people to report things. to be fair Si, you've definately done your bit reporting Ioan's stuff previously.

and yeah i'm being a defensive girlfriend, but i still think at 18 he's had a good year, it is newsworthy, and he has a lot of potential which hsould be encouraged by the media.


Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: David A on November 17, 2008, 05:40:05 pm

To be competitive on a world scale, you need money from sponsors to take long trips to work things. they need to be able to have you reported enough to make this viable therefore you need lots of shiny pictures and articles ...

and yeah I'm being a defensive girlfriend, but i still think at 18 he's had a good year ...




Am I reading this correctly ... the young fella (or at least girlfriend displaying righteous indignation on his behalf) is a bit jarred off no one is stepping forward with a plane ticket and a few bob for a trip to show the world what he can do?

... and after all the work he put in!! a scandal surely ?

The climbing community and it's media wing is small and incestuous no doubt about it but there is a lot to be said for getting on with it and letting the forums and two bit magazines do their stuff. Climbing for the glory of a centre page spread in "grimpeur" and the avalanche of free footwear that follows ain't the way to play it surely?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Pantontino on November 17, 2008, 05:49:35 pm
Although are there any hard E6s in Wales apart from Strawberries ;)

Beginner's Mind is a pretty tricky E6 - I seem to recall it being a popular 'E8' headpoint at one point. ;)

You have beginners mind at E7 in this month's column... ;)

I can see reading about the Robbins on-sighting the glue machine - a bog standard E6 - might get Katy and her young friends bristling. This is, after all, a fairly impressive tick list for the year by anyone's standards:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/showlog.html?id=27980 (http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/showlog.html?id=27980)

BTW for the nu guidebook - I think it's TheThreacherous Underfoot not, A Treacherous Underfoot. I.e. like an animal!

Phew, there's no flies on you is there Tom!

The ref to Disillusioned was only made at the end of a long list of what I'm sure even you would begrudgingly admit is (not just a 'good' year, but) an exceptional couple of months (during which it rained most days). Context is important is it not?

Ioan is clearly a very talented climber with a great future ahead of him, and perhaps (from the perspective of encouraging young talent) I should have given him a bit more coverage this year. I guess I've applied a too rigid cut off point for reporting.

You are of course correct about 'The' Treacherous Underfoot - a common mistake, which I let slip through the editorial net. (In my defense I have been somewhat distracted by a certain head twisting guidebook job, but that is in the bag now so hopefully you won't find it so easy to trip me up in future.)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: T_B on November 17, 2008, 05:50:34 pm
The point is......(take deep breath)

To be competitive on a world scale, you need money from sponsers to take long trips to work things. they need to be able to have you reported enough to make this viable therefore you need lots of shiny pictures and articles. which is where you need nice people to take photo's of you and people to report things. to be fair Si, you've definately done your bit reporting Ioan's stuff previously.

and yeah i'm being a defensive girlfriend, but i still think at 18 he's had a good year, it is newsworthy, and he has a lot of potential which hsould be encouraged by the media.


Ever heard of Stuart Cameron or Rich Simpson?

No matter how worthy your boyfriend's climbing achievements are, there isn't any money available in the UK to pay people to climb, and there's going to be even less in the next couple of years as marketing budgets get reined it and companies go bust. That's the harsh reality.

It might be more realistic for your boyfriend to get a decent job whilst training hard, then take some time out to set the world on fire?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jaspersharpe on November 17, 2008, 06:14:03 pm
The point is......(take deep breath)

To be competitive on a world scale, you need money from sponsers to take long trips to work things.


I can see why it rankles but to put things in perspective, when I was 18 I'd redpointed 8b (and very nearly 8c), done the FA's up to 8a, done Font 8A, flashed Font 7C, got to the 1/4 final of a World Cup leading comp, won the first Foundry bouldering league, onsighted E5 etc etc and all I ever got sponsorship wise was a few pairs of shoes. This was 16 years ago so the grades were a little nearer the cutting edge than they look now.  :-[

To put things further into perspective my achievements were probably the least of four 18 year olds at that time.
Malc had just flashed 8a+, done the second ascent of the hardest route in the world (8c+) and was crushing bouldering comps left right & centre. He did at least get some harnesses and ropes too.  ;) Vickers was British leading champion and one of the best trad and sport onsight climbers in the country, likewise. Stuart was scaring people shitless with his raw power and getting a pretty amazing ticklist together, likewise.

I'm not bellitling your fella's achievements one bit. He's had a pretty amazing year. Just pointing out that you can never expect to get anything financially from climbing in this country. If you do it's a bonus rather than a right. It probably frustrates you (and him) that there are climbers he sees who seem to be getting more from the sport than their achievements deserve. This too has always been the case as self promotion is a huge factor in this game.

And everything that Tom just said.  :)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on November 17, 2008, 06:33:00 pm
Jasper-who??  :-\
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: bigd942 on November 17, 2008, 06:52:38 pm
From a company side of things, what are the legal implications of having a climber on the company books and paying him/her to climb? Do climbers actually get money for climbing or for legal reasons are they paid for R&D, Marketing etc. I mean if Company X had Billy X as a sponsored climber, what happens if he goes out and hurts himself bad trying something, in these days of elf'n'safety would that not be classed as an injury at work?? Does that open the company to legal action? Is giving gear all they can really do and just pay a climber for anything but climbing, if it is then does than mean you can climb as hard as you like but if you're not liked/admired or able to be fluent/personable in front of an audience or some buyer at a trade show you might as well forget about ever getting financial rewards for your troubles.
Is it not the case that most of the big wave surfers (Mavericks, Aileens etc) just get on with it and it's done more for themselves/peer group, is that not the reality of climbing in the UK - if you get a new rope for impressing someone then all the better.

Dom
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Houdini on November 17, 2008, 07:25:15 pm
So far i know Ioans headpoints have been ignored. What should he do?

Give up climbing immediately and become a plumber.  Within two years he could be on 35K per annum.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: n_man on November 17, 2008, 11:29:04 pm
I don't know what James Pearson gets sponsorshipwise, but probably as deserving as any current Brit, he's done all sorts of cutting edge stuff. Trad repeats, at least three significant FAs and hard bouldering all over the show.

What about Ty? He seems to be here there and everywhere, is there money in climbing in the States?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on November 18, 2008, 03:58:12 am
I don't know what James Pearson gets sponsorshipwise, but probably as deserving as any current Brit, he's done all sorts of cutting edge stuff. Trad repeats, at least three significant FAs and hard bouldering all over the show.

What about Ty? He seems to be here there and everywhere, is there money in climbing in the States?
I don't know what James Pearson gets sponsorshipwise, but probably as deserving as any current Brit, he's done all sorts of cutting edge stuff. Trad repeats, at least three significant FAs and hard bouldering all over the show.

What about Ty? He seems to be here there and everywhere, is there money in climbing in the States?

I think Ty's parents aren't short of a bob or two but I could be wrong.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 18, 2008, 09:18:12 am
Hi guys and girls, I thought Jaspers reply was spot on. Whatever money is available ( not much) should go to the elite. If there is some money going from the government maybe it would be nice for it to go to the juniors.
Anyway real standards, where are they. Look at Jaspers post, and try and see who we have like even him now. I have looked at lots of info on many sites and the great grit debacle does seem as bad as I thought, not good mind. The use of pads on the routes is more than iffy (if other people dont agree fine(( I wish I didnt have to keep qualifing every thing))), Onsight was defined in my era by many and agreed on by many , it meant at first sight(just like a vue) and the only available extra knowledge was agreed to be info  generally available from a guide book. On sight is very much abused(was in my day to), the hard onsight you hear about often are flashs. If Gaia had been graded as E7 (like it should always have been) many other routes would obvoiusly drop to and E grades might make more sense.Now then not to be sizist but clearly jonny was a very talented slab dwarf and alex is very good alround and bigger, makes for a very big difference on morpho routes. Many of my routes have changed grades over the years up down and side ways, some have even fallen down, some times I was hurt because I invest to much of my ego in them. If you can stay cool( hard) then the grades might become more accurate. So where are we in this debate. Gaia has not had a proper onsight(proberbly can only now get a good flash), if it is E7 this says alot. A very attractive elegant groove easy access from the hub of british climbing and still not had a proper ascent, so I would have to say that a very good onsight grade is E7. Gaia is 5.12b X, Some 5.12 bs were onsight soloed many years ago. I was told that maybe a handfull of E8s have been onsighted, but I really dont know enough about climbing anymore, to make any comment.      good luck, Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: katy on November 18, 2008, 09:30:46 am
I'm not saying he should get loads of money now, hell no. however ya do need support from loads of different sides in order to develop a certain image which may then become attractive to sponsers in some way, money, boots, gear etc. fuck, even getting 3 pairs of boots a year saves you bout 200 or more quid so it makes massive amounts of difference. thats a trips worth of food or flights?esp when you basically have to save every penny. every body gave me loads of names, and am i right in believing that at least one felt they didn't have enough supprt and so quit? and they are all mega talented but not really climbing any more, britains standards go down because we don't support our best climbers?so yeah i think thats a waste.
i'm using ioan as an example coz its someone that i know. he may not be the best example in know that!

The thread was about britains standards, and we have plenty of talent. Britian has a theme of being highly critical about anyone other than the best. all you do with that is shoot yourself in the foot because we're not really encouraging people to go and climb and try hard and maybe become better than they are,
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on November 18, 2008, 09:59:34 am
I think it might be worth someone explaining the harsh realities of the climbing world. There is very little money out there. Even someone like James P got very little for years

The first thing is that the media is small, struggling and as a result not brilliantly conected. They don't have the resources to do any investigative reporting. This has two consequences - if you don't tell them yourself, or get a close friend to do it, they won't know about it. And second, if you do tell them, they will almost certainly report it. The two together mean there has always been a large discrepancy between what goes on at the crags and what goes on in the mags. Whinging on the net won't help, they still won't come looking for you. What you need to do is tell the mags in the first place, and also realise photos make news much more publishable.

Folk get sponsored if they ask for it. Unfortunately this means writing a CV and begging letters, often this is too demeaning for the average youth who thinks the world owes them something. It certainly was for me, plus the act of writing a CV is a pretty good wake-up call to whether you are actually deserving of sponsorship. Unless you are very well connected no one is going to walk up and offer you sponsorship. Unfortunately the climbing has to come first. Living in Wales you've got by far the most benevolent sponsor there, one of the few that is happy to support people rather than buying advertising space on your trousers in return for fuck all.



As for the main topic, having seen Alex climb I can say he is pretty much the most talented climber I've ever seen on grit. And I've seen most of them. Likewise, Kevin has one of the most impressive CVs of anyone who's ever been to Burbage. His ground-up of Parthian was very much aided by Bransby's efforts, and I daresay if Ben was a bit taller he would have been first up.

None of these guys have much of a clue about grades yet so I wouldn't put too much store by the comments. I think Gaia should remain at the bottom of the E8 grade, likewise End of the Affair, they have been benchmarks for many years and at 22 years old its about fucking time someone made them look easy. One of the reasons they seem 'easy' is because they lend themselves to headpointing - 'trick' or technical moves in a dangerous place that are very fluffable onsight but easy to wire with practice.

I've been banging this drum for years but between the number of folk who top-roped them as youths, and ther ones who are strong but can't climb, there's very few climbers in the Peak left to try these things and there certainly hasn't been any pressure.

With this and the onsight film I hope grit climbing will get a kick up the arse. The list of last great lines is feeble, whilst the list of routes that need climbing in half-decent style is huge. The future of grit is ground-up.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Dave Westlake on November 18, 2008, 10:10:51 am
Hi Katy,

Is this the same Ioan (pronounced yo-han?? :-\) that I met in Ceuse this year?  ...the one who had a TV company with him who were making a documentary and funding the trip (i think?).  With all the DMM gear?

If so then to be honest I think he's getting his share of the small amount of resources/ funds available.  Especially bearing in mind I know at least 2 people who are his age and climbing as hard/ harder who struggle to get free shoes.

Don't take this the wrong way, he just seems like a bad example to use as the basis of your (otherwise fairly valid) argument.  The 14yr old onsighting E6 may be a better one?  Sounds like that would fall into the "not shit" category, but like others have said if you don't seek publicity you rarely get it.

Dave
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: grimer on November 18, 2008, 10:30:43 am
That's it. There just isn't much money kicking around. And no -one has ever been rewarded for being quietly good.

But surely there's things one can do to get financial rewards for climbing. Two people who spring to mind are Andy Kirkpatrick and Ian Parnell. Both really good, but as far as I can tell, they're not the Steve MacLures of their game. But they both have made themselves attractive to the media by doing lots of writing, photography, lectures, self-promotion, and ended up making cash out of climbing. They have both worked really hard at it. If they write something, it will be more interesting than a basic trip report. If they do a lecture, it may well be quite entertaining and funny, with great photos that they have taken themselves. They will get exposure for their sponsors, and give feedback on products.

I'm sure there's a million things Ioan etc could do - write an interesting blog, do interesting little video clips, getting in touch with mags and seeing is there anything they can do. Climbing is brilliant and fun. Work tends to be more like work, but is usually what people get paid for. I bet even Leo works hard in his own way.

Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Three Nine on November 18, 2008, 11:12:50 am
I climbed with Ioan in Buoux at easter and he had several pairs of free solutions and lots of dmm gear - seemed to be doing well for himself in the way of sponsorship AND media attention in the way of a guy filming him. He was very good and a very likeable chap, but a million miles behind the cutting edge, even for someone so young.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: al on November 18, 2008, 11:29:54 am
all this grade/number stuff illustrates what i've always loved about gritstone more than any other rock; that it can't be reduced to numbers, and all this confusion underlines this - when you rock up to a piece of grit of whatever standard you are dealing with many ambiguities, not a campus board. Tough if its confusing for people who don't climb on it, or are visiting, but thats not a problem if they have a desire for the deeper experience - if they just want to tick some boxes on their 8anu card however, then it may be more problematic.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: chummer on November 18, 2008, 11:51:18 am

'Is this the same Ioan (pronounced yo-han?? :-\) that I met in Ceuse this year?  ...the one who had a TV company with him who were making a documentary and funding the trip (i think?).  With all the DMM gear?'

Is this also the same Ioan who had a full length TV program on tele on the back of a funded trip to Spain and America who also had another funded trip planned for Yosemite this year?

Seems he's getting an amazing deal to me katy, very few top end British climbers get funded trips and lets be honest he's not even top end (though obviously a talented climber)

So maybe your response to this thread could have actually contained the knowledge of how to get such support instead of the mis guided muse of somebody who doesn't quite realise just how many talented climbers get sweet FA and still get shit loads done both here and abroad. (i am sure you mean well katy)  
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on November 18, 2008, 12:05:24 pm

'Is this the same Ioan (pronounced yo-han?? :-\) that I met in Ceuse this year?  ...the one who had a TV company with him who were making a documentary and funding the trip (i think?).  With all the DMM gear?'

Is this also the same Ioan who had a full length TV program on tele on the back of a funded trip to Spain and America who also had another funded trip planned for Yosemite this year?

 :o :o :o
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Nigel on November 18, 2008, 12:37:29 pm
Hi Katy,

Is this the same Ioan (pronounced yo-han?? :-\) that I met in Ceuse this year?  ...the one who had a TV company with him who were making a documentary and funding the trip (i think?).  With all the DMM gear?


Is this the same Ioan Doyle who drinks a gallon of Cristal every hour from solid gold taps (which he leaves running) in a diamond mansion on the moon, pausing only to eat £50 note sandwiches. Courtesy of DMM.

P.S. I have no idea who Ioan Doyle is.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Hockstack on November 18, 2008, 02:10:26 pm
Poor Ioan, someone is going to be in the shit (katy). Ioan has his own veiws and sould not be pulled into this because of his girl. Shame on you Kate.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: n_man on November 25, 2008, 09:35:43 am
This from Matt Segals blog and losing his psyche on climbing....whilst in England....perhaps a good account of why its tricky to climb hard in the Peak????

There were three paragraphs before this about finding it hard as a full time climber as well.



Being in England has been especially hard since the climbing days are limited due to weather. You have to be ready to step up at any moment, the good weather windows can be short so there’s always the pressure to get out while its good since it never stays good for long. One bad day of climbing turns into a week of bad climbing when it rains for days and you’re left to climbing in the gym… This has been my trip, and I haven’t been able to make the good days count…

I know it’s all in my head but its hard to rally on scary climbs when you’re not psyched to climb anything… With one week left I’m going to make the best of it; simply get outside and try and do what I do best, hopefully I will rediscover my love for climbing, something I think I’ve lost since I’ve been in England…
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on November 29, 2008, 08:54:12 am
morning, as I dont know much about british climbing any more, I was wondering how a routelet like Steve dunnings very sweet looking High Fidelity clocks in the grit numbers. Anyway as a more general point it looks like we have survived the last invasion ( their honesty about mats and style was very frank) and perhaps (?) we have similarly able climbers. What is clear is that like the belgians they did not do anything supper hard, more than possibly this was because they were very happy enjoying themelves, what is also clear, is that their are some odd grades about, or odd ways of wieghing rock difficulty. I personaly did not find the ascents of the belgians or the yanks mind boggling (after looking at style) and am quiet interested what they chose not to do and am also interested in the fact that the brits in the same time did very little. Like I mentioned before soloing the Moonlight is very out there, as is soloing the Fish, these are not broken ankle jobs after all. If we do get a fully competant 9a  climber ie multiple 9s, familiar with different rock type quality, and gear who is completly bonkers we might get an E10 repeated proberly.
The only thing Iave learnt out of this is that the brit scene is a bit insular, I may of course be wrong, Stevie.     
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Drew on November 29, 2008, 08:06:34 pm
hopefully I will rediscover my love for climbing, something I think I’ve lost since I’ve been in England…

He didn't seem too bad t'other day at Cratcliffe! I don't know what he was like earlier in the day, but when we turned up he seemed pretty psyched!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Stoat on November 30, 2008, 10:26:45 pm
Katy

Twenty odd years ago a mate of mine thrashed the world record for front-hops on a BMX. We lay around smoking and drinking cider and clapped. He for some reason did not get a sponsor deal from Haro (the bike he was riding (divorced parents)). Maybe he should have asked?

To make money in a non-mainstream sport is always going to mean pimping yourself out.

Good luck to him anyway.

PS. To older readers he had Redline Flight cranks as well the lucky bastard!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: c.j.d. on December 01, 2008, 09:01:32 pm
 
 With regards to standards, I can only think of two youths who will take over the British scene (bouldering) and move on to challenge other world class boulderers.  This will only happen if they don't get lazy or to tied up in the whole, very boring, grade debate.  No one is pushing limits at the moment - fast repeats fair enough, but new ground?  Not happening.

The British scene is a funny one, and has changed alot in the last 15 years.  It seems like there is less of a true scene these days - have we forgotten to put fun and reckles abandon alongside being dedicated and hardcore?  There is no underground scene any more - just youths with spots and very clean Prana pants (good sponsorship or fat bank account?).

I do think that climbers have lost the drive to ascend new problems, and go looking for the Grail.  This could be laziness, or maybe just a lack of imagination.  Its really easy to get good now - everyone can do that - but to use it?  Different ball game.  It could be a lack of money, or time, or as Katy put it on page one, something like 'we've got alot on our plates'.  Get real, I climbed V14 working about 75 hours a week with two young children, sole provider to a family of four - that's tricky, but I do know what I need to do to achieve something hard, so sorry, no excuses kids.

The media is a load of shite - uninspiring magazines aimed at uninspired climbers - this must be the case, otherwise they would not get away with the bollocks that they print.  Years ago, you would read a mag cover to cover, and then again, just to make sure you had not missed anything - this has definitley changed.  Hmmmm, ponder ponder...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: nodder on December 01, 2008, 10:00:21 pm
I agree with most of that but there is a scene possibly even more underground than it was as these people have realised they have nothing to gain through selling themselves.  Someone random pops up does something awesome gets a load of shit for daring to be an unknown.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: the little drummer girl on December 01, 2008, 11:11:33 pm
Fucking aye.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Bonjoy on December 02, 2008, 08:53:23 am

 With regards to standards, I can only think of two youths who will take over the British scene (bouldering) and move on to challenge other world class boulderers.  This will only happen if they don't get lazy or to tied up in the whole, very boring, grade debate.  No one is pushing limits at the moment - fast repeats fair enough, but new ground?  Not happening.

The British scene is a funny one, and has changed alot in the last 15 years.  It seems like there is less of a true scene these days - have we forgotten to put fun and reckles abandon alongside being dedicated and hardcore?  There is no underground scene any more - just youths with spots and very clean Prana pants (good sponsorship or fat bank account?).

I do think that climbers have lost the drive to ascend new problems, and go looking for the Grail.  This could be laziness, or maybe just a lack of imagination.  Its really easy to get good now - everyone can do that - but to use it?  Different ball game.  It could be a lack of money, or time, or as Katy put it on page one, something like 'we've got alot on our plates'.  Get real, I climbed V14 working about 75 hours a week with two young children, sole provider to a family of four - that's tricky, but I do know what I need to do to achieve something hard, so sorry, no excuses kids.

The media is a load of shite - uninspiring magazines aimed at uninspired climbers - this must be the case, otherwise they would not get away with the bollocks that they print.  Years ago, you would read a mag cover to cover, and then again, just to make sure you had not missed anything - this has definitley changed.  Hmmmm, ponder ponder...
Pure rubbish. I disagree with almost every word.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 02, 2008, 10:06:06 am
Well said. Sounds to me more like CJ has just grown out of the scene. Are mags really that much worse, or are you just no longer interested?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: nik at work on December 02, 2008, 10:22:48 am
I've resisted posting on this thread as I feel I am of a previous generation and not in touch with the current scene very much (in fact I was never really in touch with scene when I was a young thing but that's rather by the by). However I would raise a few points:

Our current crop of climbers seem very good to me. They appear highly motivated and climb in good style, often improving on previous ascents. Historically the very best have always been small in number (just a handful of climbers) with a chasing pack following behind. The fact that this is still currently the case should hardly indicate the death of British climbing.

The visiting Americans have had a great trip and done lots of routes in good style. They managed to get some excellent weather whilst they were here (although they may disagree :)) and used it well. They also had great skill, talent and enthusiasm. And, as a credit to us, a number of willing and enthusiastic tour guides. Pats on the back all round. But when you look at what they actually did in terms of breaking new ground perhaps they didn't tear us apart quite as much as seems to be thought. Ignoring The Promise and The Groove for a minute what did they actually do?
Well they ground-upped Parthian, now if this is E9 then thats a first E9 ground-up. But the fact that it can be safely ground-upped with multiple falls coupled with their opinions on the route suggests that it may be E8. Now E8 ground-up is seriously impressive, but not ground breaking. They headpointed Meshuga, but thats been done several times before. Again a great effort, but not ground-breaking. They flashed Gaia, now this is new, Gaia hasn't been flashed before, but E8 has. In fact E8 flashes have been happening sporadically on the grit for almost 10 years. Again it's a very impressive ascent but still not breaking a new grade boundary. I'd also add that they knew the route was safe-ish having seen the gear hold a fall, which is always nice for calming the nerves. Masters Edge onsight? Brilliant, but it was very ticked up apparently (not by them I hasten to add), and it's E7. Now E7 onsight is still impressive, but has been happening on grit for very many years (just not this route).
Now The Promise. They headpointed it and discovered a new sequence apparently, I don't know the route so can't comment on this but ultimately they felt it was E8. So they headpointed E8, good but not extraordinary. The Groove it seems they didn't climb the same line as James and the line they did they felt was E8(?), so again an E8 headpoint.
No denying a very good trip on a rocktype that it seems really plays to their strengths (I don't know them so base this statement only on the various bits of media of late) but hardly ripping the scene apart.

As for the downgrades of James routes, then they have offered an opinion on the grading. As more people repeat these routes a concensus grade will emerge. When James first climbed these routes he was operating in a bubble, he could only base his grading on how they felt to him and put forward his opinion based on his previous experiences. This is incredibly hard and often woefully innacurate. It does not in any way suggest that either the grading system is broken or that James is a rampant overgrader, just that he maybe got it a bit wrong. Or the Americans got it a bit wrong. Or they both got it a bit wrong. Over time concensus will emerge. Anyway this is a different debate.

For me the solo of London Wall is just staggering, but then I can't climb cracks.

My opinion is that Stevie and his fellow doubters should sleep easy, the futures in safe hands, the kids know what the're doing....
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on December 02, 2008, 10:36:55 am
just that he maybe got it a bit wrong. Or the Americans got it a bit wrong. Or they both got it a bit wrong. Over time concensus will emerge.
Exactly. Basically dozens of pages and hundreds of threads of waffling on about this issue can pared down to that essential simplicity.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: c.j.d. on December 02, 2008, 12:56:59 pm
Now then, Mr Brown, are you trying to say I'm old or something - how very dare you!  I don't think I have grown out of the scene - I just don't think much of the one that there is!  Things have changed alot with regards to the way people look at our sport, become involved in it and how people choose to witter on about it. 

There was never so much absolute drivvel as there is now, or is this just my view - could be, who knows?

Anyhow, just go climbing and pull down. Use your imagination and whatever you do - DO NOT FOLLOW THE CROWD.

Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 02, 2008, 02:07:45 pm
Lots of sense talked there Nick, but this;

Quote
Well they ground-upped Parthian, now if this is E9 then thats a first E9 ground-up. But the fact that it can be safely ground-upped with multiple falls coupled with their opinions on the route suggests that it may be E8.

is nonsense and only smacks of a closed grading system. This was the first E9 ground-up, by no means perfect style, but a step forward nonetheless.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: nik at work on December 02, 2008, 02:48:02 pm
I didn't wish to imply a closed system (because it isn't), and as I don't know the route at all I am in no position to comment on the grade. All I was suggesting is that at the time of the first ascent I was under the impression that the flake/gear was considered not adequate to take a fall and that, coupled with the obvious difficulty of the climbing, led to the grade of E9. Current thinking seems to be that the gear is good and the flake solid which may (or may not, I'm in no position to comment) adjust the grade downwards. Also I believe (although I may be remembering this incorrectly) that the Americans suggested that the route was E8. Of course this may have been because they were under the impression that trad grades were a closed system stopping at E10, I really don't know. Maybe I was foolish to comment on the Parthian grade, after all I know nothing of the route and have never tried it. Perhaps I worded that element of the posting poorly, not making my meaning clear. Suffice it to say that if concensus is that it is E9 then that's good enough for me, and equally if concensus is that it is E8 then so be it. I still think my main point is valid. In that whilst they had a great trip and produced a world class performance they didn't completely blow the Sheffield/UK scene out of the water.

I happily take back the Parthian grade comment from the posting, whilst still standing by my conclusions.

Fair?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 02, 2008, 02:58:04 pm
I think your summary was otherwise perfect, the Parthian bit just reminded me of Dave Pegg's daft statement that when Master's edge gets onsighted it should be downgraded, on principle, to E6.

I think Parthian has settled as benchmark an E9 as we have. That New Statesman may be as hard doesn't change that I don't think.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: nik at work on December 02, 2008, 03:10:55 pm
Ah fair enough. I was't trying to suggest that I think Parthian should on principle be downgraded to E8, just that there have been "E8" noises made by other people. Parthian benchmark E9? I'll accept that. In which case they have done the first ground-up of an E9, which is amazing and a step forward. But still just a single step really, hardly light years ahead of what has gone before (not to detract from the achievement which is hugely impressive of course).
It seems we agree pretty much completely so I'll write no more. After all if both you and I are of the same mind then surely it must be considered F.A.C.T., that's SCIENCE that is  :)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 02, 2008, 03:18:21 pm
Yeah. I think it would look a bit petulant to downgrade their one real coup. Although I think Gaia was another, even if Alex thought it was piss. Kevin proved otherwise by falling off.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on December 02, 2008, 03:21:26 pm
On a bit of a tangent, I think British Women seem to be doing very well atm.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: T_B on December 02, 2008, 03:39:53 pm
On a bit of a tangent, I think British Women seem to be doing very well atm.

Big up from the Workers for Mia Stacey doing Super Prestat recently. Yes I know it 'only' gets 7b+ or 7b but I wonder how many British women have done it? And she holds down a gnarly job.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on December 02, 2008, 03:41:54 pm
and Mina on impossible slab or whatever its called, Brad Pit must have felt easy compared to that shit!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: T_B on December 02, 2008, 03:54:28 pm
My opinion is that Stevie and his fellow doubters should sleep easy, the futures in safe hands, the kids know what the're doing....

Nik, your post is a bit Monty Python-esque!

"Well... apart from Parthian Shot, The Promise, New Statesman, Gaia, End of the Affair, The Groove, Simba's Pride, Meshuga, Kaluza Klein, Master's Edge, London Wall solo... what did they actually do?"

Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: nik at work on December 02, 2008, 04:17:22 pm
I think you are (deliberately?) missing my point. I'm not saying "what did the actually do?" rather they did stuff that was brilliant and amazing and impressive etc etc etc. But that what they did, whilst very brilliant and amazing and impressive etc etc, was not light years ahead of what had gone before despite what some people seem to think. We have not been blown out of the water.

I am impressed by what they have done (which is a great deal), very impressed.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Bonjoy on December 02, 2008, 05:56:12 pm
Now then, Mr Brown, are you trying to say I'm old or something - how very dare you!  I don't think I have grown out of the scene - I just don't think much of the one that there is!  Things have changed alot with regards to the way people look at our sport, become involved in it and how people choose to witter on about it. 

There was never so much absolute drivvel as there is now, or is this just my view - could be, who knows?

Anyhow, just go climbing and pull down. Use your imagination and whatever you do - DO NOT FOLLOW THE CROWD.


What do you mean by scene? How much time have you spent recently experiencing the Peak scene, or the Yorkshire scene or the Lakes scene or any of the other scenes other than your local one? How have you gathered enough information to be so dismissive. The interenet is not the same as the scene.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 02, 2008, 07:30:56 pm
Quote
Big up from the Workers for Mia Stacey doing Super Prestat recently. Yes I know it 'only' gets 7b+ or 7b but I wonder how many British women have done it?

Too right. And judging by the mere 13 registered repetitions (http://bleau.info/cuvier/248.html), [cf carnage (http://bleau.info/cuvier/253.html)], it maintains a reputation bigger than its grade. Even with my 'slab credentials' as Cofe put it, it still took me longer than Carnage.  
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: jfw on December 02, 2008, 08:08:01 pm
mia did l'impossible as well as super prestat - i didn't know mina had as well - go girls team!

Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on December 02, 2008, 08:12:44 pm
it could just be me being a little thick.

I heard they'd been putting the lads to shame.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Kim on December 02, 2008, 09:16:12 pm
mia did l'impossible as well as super prestat - i didn't know mina had as well - go girls team!

l'impossible - now that's a tick too, harder than SP I reckon whatever the grades say. In a similar vein, compare repeats with Jet set next door.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: c.j.d. on December 03, 2008, 08:13:34 am
Bonjoy (real name?) - I'm not here to start an argument, this is purely my view on things.  If you new me, it would be very apparent that I am far from an interenet based 'witterer'.  How long have you been climbing for? 

My climbing career has been pretty awesome so far with regards to people I have climbed and hung out with in various scenario's, i.e. British scene, hanging with the old school before they where old (sorry guys!), 90's new school, through to the crowd we have now.  Also, I've climbed been involved with some great people (and great developments) that we have all probably (or should have) heard of from all over Europe.  It really is very different now - come on old schoolers, back up needed here!

One thing that is very different when you hook up with old freinds from overseas - the scene has remained the same, with the one difference - they are pushing the standards, and do not bitch and moan about half the bollocks mentioned on here.  Sorry Bonjoy, if you were'nt there, you missed out!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: grimer on December 03, 2008, 11:00:03 am
What the Americans did seems pretty impressive to me. The first flash (near on-sight) of Gaia, one of grit's most prized routes; flash of End of the Affair; first ground-up of Parthian (which, incidentally, even if this is accepted as E9, surely it can be no more 'benchmark' than EotA or Gaia); a quick repeat of the 'hardest route on grit'.

Plus everything else. Who else has done anything remotely as impressive as this?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: uptown on December 03, 2008, 11:10:20 am
Who else has done anything remotely as impressive as this?

I can appreciate how Brits don't make the best of skiers, but I'm a tad shocked that we aren't closer to the cutting edge of grit developments seeing as we own the rock...
(Don't take this personally anyone ::))
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: nik at work on December 03, 2008, 11:22:44 am
Is that directed at me Grimer?
I don't know how I can make this any clearer and I feel like I'm repeating myself a bit but here goes:
What they did was incredibly impressive, amazingly impressive, astoundingly impressive. They are truly a world class act puuting in a world class performance on grit. Absolutely. Hats off to them. In a short time they have done a huge amount and it's (trying to think of a word I've not used yet...ummmmmm) flabbergasting. Stupendous. Etc etc.

I AM IMPRESSED.

But (and in the following I in no way take anything away from their amazing performance) I don't think that they have completely blown British climbing out of the water. I'm also not saying we have matched their performance. This has been the best 6 week(?) performance on grit by a team ever I'd guess. But there have been good British performances which whilst maybe not equivalent are certainly creditable and not far behind. Just because they did well doesn't mean we are shit, and it is that line of thinking that I think is wrong.

Lets not forget they are three world class climbers and it seems that grit very much suits their style. We shouldn't be surprised that they come over here and do well. I just don't see that they've trampled all over our 'scene'.

And just to be completely clear, what the Americans did is very impressive and I have at no point said it isn't.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jaspersharpe on December 03, 2008, 11:25:53 am
I wish you'd stop being so fucking negative.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: nik at work on December 03, 2008, 11:28:57 am
 :lol:
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: dave on December 03, 2008, 11:37:55 am
I'd ditto what nik has said. Also, can we safely assume that these guys are sponsored full-timers? (i honestly don't know). they've had several weeks of being able to watch the weather and be out at the crags as much as possible. Contrast to most of the brit ascensionists of relatively recent hard grit routes - welford, grieve, bentley, bransby etc (was pearson climbing full-time when he did equilibrium?) most had jobs, if not full time then at least part time, which makes a vast difference. If you're only climbing weekends and waiting for the combo of form and right nick to onsight your E8 or headpoint your E10 and making sure you're at that rght crag at the right time you could be waiting for months if not years. plus that whole road-trip momentum thing can't be underestimated. if they came over here to live they wouldn't be doing a E9 every few days, i can guarantee it. They've done great inspirational things, but its not as if all UK tradsters aught to be ashamed of themselves by any means. afterall, if we weren't putting these hard routes up in the first place they wouldn't have any routes to repeat. So I recon is mad props all round - chin chin.

(also, to put things in perspective, what we generally don't hear about is when strong foreign climbers come over here and do preciscely fuck all. whihc can lead to a slightly skewed interpretation of foreign trad prowess compared to our own).
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on December 03, 2008, 11:49:48 am
(also, to put things in perspective, what we generally don't hear about is when strong foreign climbers come over here and do preciscely fuck all. whihc can lead to a slightly skewed interpretation of foreign trad prowess compared to our own).

The 'ol publication bias problem.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: lagerstarfish on December 03, 2008, 11:51:09 am
Despite Nik's storm of derision and negativity, I myself am impressed by the performance of these visiting climbers.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: uptown on December 03, 2008, 11:52:34 am
I can appreciate how Brits don't make the best of skiers, but I'm a tad shocked that we aren't closer to the cutting edge of grit developments seeing as we own the rock...

I can see it now -
World cup downhill 2008
1st place - Mr Austria
2nd place - Mr Brit
3rd place - Mr Brit

The parallels are obvious. The best training for grit is obviously not grit. CJD dispels your main argument Dave.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: dave on December 03, 2008, 11:59:09 am
I don't see how Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease comes into it.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: T_B on December 03, 2008, 12:10:31 pm
I don't know how I can make this any clearer...

So let's get this straight. You're very impressed, but you don't think that they have completely blown British climbing out of the water?  :P
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: nik at work on December 03, 2008, 12:28:21 pm
Did you all get together at The Works last night and collectively plan operation "piss take"? :)

P.S. Sorry for my previous negativity, I hope it hasn't reflected badly on the UK climbing scene as a whole...

Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 03, 2008, 12:55:16 pm
I am still not very clear about British standards. Keep posting.
Grimmer, a few years ago a lad called Wolfe did some good things on grit he came, saw, got enthused and sent, E5/6 soloes on sight and a few hardish things(?) I am not really up to the date on stuff and the way the media and some climbers make mistakes it is hard to have a good understanding. With the grit, there is so much difference in the small things, like a bit of extra, knowledge, or a mat in the right place. You know I always thought that stuff like Mesuga would be soloed but think of a similarly graded route in scotland, the lakes or wales and you can see there is maybe the world of difference. I am sure we have climbers who are as good as the septics who recently graced our little edges , but these arnt really the best climbers in the world. If we have a climber as good as Honult at climbing cracks above 600 feet of rectum emptying void I surely havent been told his name. Steve Mac seems to be a world class climber and other than that I am not sure we have learnt very much. Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Bonjoy on December 03, 2008, 01:03:11 pm
c.j.d – I’ve no wish to have some ‘who’s most old school’ willy waving contest. Suffice to say I’ve been climbing for over twenty years, mostly based in Sheffield but with long stints of foreign travel and plenty of time spent around the UK as a boulderer and roped climber.
You miss my point anyway. I was not questioning the diversity of your experience over the last ten years internationally. I was questioning your recent experience of the whole UK scene (you remember, the one you completely dismissed). I don’t recall seeing you spending loads of time around Sheffield and if you haven’t, how can you write it off, or any other area’s scene? I assume these only two potential superstars you are thinking of are the very best in the UK, rather than the best youngsters you see at your local crags and walls.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: grimer on December 03, 2008, 01:05:12 pm
Yes Tobias Wolfe. He was an Elbesandstein climber, so used to soloing. He was crap at placing gear, and came a cropper falling off ray's Roof when his cam ropped. He flashed things like a peg-protected E7 at Millstone. Also - get this - fell off Parthian about eight times, each time getting a local climber, John Horscroft, to abseil in and place his gear in the flake. Bear in mind, this was before it was reclassified as bomber. That's a responsibility I wouldn't have fancied.

I think, as someone said, there probably are people quietly ticking away, Ian Vickers and people, but it strikes me that Britain suffers from having so few unclimbed inspiring lines.

Imagine how exciting it must be to think you could free a new route on El cap?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: SA Chris on December 03, 2008, 02:31:15 pm
For unclimbed inspiring lines look north and west. There are tons.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: TomP on December 03, 2008, 05:05:22 pm
I can't really be arsed to get fully into this topic but I think we have a great British scene. I don't know much about routes but watching Neil Dickson on sighting E8 etc was fucking impressive in On Sight. There are plenty of very good traditionalists around who keep a low profile.
I think it is only fair to comment on scenes that you are involved in. You may get drips and drabs on info from media and websites but people send impressive things quite often and it just stays amongst friends. Dismissing the British scene due to some American visitors is ludicrous!

Our bouldering standards are pretty impressive too. The 8c boulderers in the world dedicate their whole lives to it. I read it ealier but the point that we have so few professional climbers is very important. We do pretty well over here as I can't think of a single full-time boulderer and some hard shit gets done. We do have some world class ones here. To name a few: Andy Earl, Malc, Gareth, Matt Birch and (I know he likes to keep a low profile) but Mickey Paige sounds like the real deal too. The list of 8b boulderer is also impressive to show the current standards here.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 03, 2008, 06:59:04 pm
Nik, if you really want to piss on their chips you could pick the third member of team usa, look at his CV, and then ask why he got completely spanked.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: jwi on December 03, 2008, 08:41:04 pm
Nik, if you really want to piss on their chips you could pick the third member of team usa, look at his CV, and then ask why he got completely spanked.

Cause he's from Boulder, probably the gayest place in the Universe?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: cofe on December 03, 2008, 08:44:42 pm
Nik, if you really want to piss on their chips you could pick the third member of team usa, look at his CV, and then ask why he got completely spanked.

Cause he's from Boulder, probably the gayest place in the Universe?

that's a genius post.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: n_man on December 04, 2008, 06:56:21 am
That would explain why it has the highest number of single females in the States then. To think I only heard half the story...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: the little drummer girl on December 06, 2008, 10:34:32 am
Fucking aye.

Rich keeps forgetting to check whether I'm logged in when he posts.

I'm wondering how many more he's left under the guise of his hot girlfriend. It'll all go to shit when somebody tries to talk to me about climbing in real life.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: c.j.d. on December 08, 2008, 02:55:51 pm



Quote
I’ve no wish to have some ‘who’s most old school’ willy waving contest

Fuck me Bonjoy, put it away!  I think you are missing my point.  I've no idea who you are, but I am not into having an argument, which I think you're after for some strange reason. 

If you are happy in the thought that the scene, both of climbers pushing the grades, and the scene being cool etc, feel free - thats your view, as mine is very much my personal view.

Adios.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 09, 2008, 10:26:06 am
So please take what I am going to say, calmly, its after all a discission. British standards are a drift, they are at sea, higgledy piggledy, we are behind in real terms and also the reporting on DVDs, mags, peoples web sites is totaly(a few exceptions) out of order. The groove was not even touted but stated as the hardest trad route in the world!!!! Its a safe bit of elegant grit. The Promise is, come on, what?  Eota was never thought to be bench mark E8. There are routes all over the country that are harder, wake up. When Neil dryer soloed the Untochables there werent reams of guff  about it (probably just as hard as doing Promise.) I feel conned except I guess I knew all the time, my own fault. To use mats for your own enjoyment is fine an dandy but are you really  doing the busness,  or am I confused. Steve Mac (probably best Uk climber) is two grades off the world onsighting leval ( not my estimation) , he took two days to red point an 8c which Sharma onsighted(?) after the lad had been working a much harder route, Humilda by the way is incredible and should be on every bodys hit list. Its also had 8 ascent Pod not 4. 13 year old pubescent boy child from Nice climbs basically the same tick list as Scotish alrounder Dave Mcleod (the alrounder who hasnt even climbed in the Alps and now saying Steve Mac didnt do Rapsody) Jee I am more than confused. Dont think for a second that I am being mean, I am really excited about climbing and not the slightest bit negative, but come one of britains supposed top climbers who doesnt know how to judge whether a pro piece is good or not, shit if I did stuff like that amount of over grading I would have been the laughing stock of Wales. I repeat I am not being mean , but if it looks like a Duck, walks like a Duck, and finnaly starts talking Duck, well it might be a Duck.  Good training to all, Stevie.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: dave on December 09, 2008, 10:38:34 am
we are behind in real terms

who's this "we" you keep refering to?

seems to me all you want to stir up here is some kinda of jingoistic feeling which for the most part in the UK just doesn't exist about the climbing here. people are psyched for whoever comes and climbs hard things. And if "we" are so far behind, why do the foreign climbers who are much better then Uk climbers not put some of their own routes (i.e. the true mark of a climber with vision and commitment) rather than just repeating stuff. Am I right in thinking the yanks tried equilibrium, and 8 year old route (and I presume bentley wasn't a full time paid climber at the time) and didn't do it? Also don't forget the same route (the promise) you seem to be using as fuel for this "everyone is better than british climbers" drum-banggin episode has just been ground-upped by 2 brits. that knocks the yanks ascent into a cocked hat really. so just how far behind are "we"?

I think the notion of trying to stir up controversy where it doesn't exist is wearing a little thin.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: SA Chris on December 09, 2008, 10:49:32 am
13 year old pubescent boy child from Nice climbs basically the same tick list as Scotish alrounder Dave Mcleod

Who is this kid btw? and where is this tick list we can compare to?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Stu Littlefair on December 09, 2008, 01:24:20 pm
At a guess it was Geoffray de Flaubergeges, or however his name is spelt. Regardless of who he is, the kid is a beast. Neil Mawson was flabbergasted by the casual way he would turn up at the crag, tick a 6c to get warm, onsight an 8a, tick an 8c, go home, repeat.

I was lucky enough to see Sharma on Humildes Pas Casa at Oliana two days ago. It was perfectly clear he had plenty of gas left in the tank whilst onsighting 8c. If you read the spanish blogs the last few days have seen countless ascents of 8c and harder at two crags alone.

From the above, it should be perfectly apparent to everyone that, when it comes to european sport climbing, british climbers are miles and miles and miles off the pace. Stevie shouldn't get a slagging, or be accused of drumming up controversy for stating the obvious. Basically, no british climbers have the stamina or power endurance to compare: consider that Steve is just out of touch with top standards and is absolutely miles clear of everyone else.

More interesting questions would be: are the british lagging behind at their own style of sport climbing (short, power endurance-type routes)? Does it have a limiting effect on british trad climbing? I think the answers to those questions are both yes, but not by as much as the euro sport grades lead you to believe, because we tend to have other assets as climbers, like strong heads (not me) and a relative excess of power (me). On the other hand, if Bransbubble had the stamina to onsight 8c, what could he manage at Range West?

The killer question is - does it matter? Again, I think yes. If we all want to improve at the climbing we do then surely we can learn from the fact that we are so far off the (sport climbing) pace, and look abroad to see what we can do to improve our standards...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jaspersharpe on December 09, 2008, 01:49:27 pm
Have endless miles of amazing steep limestone crags and a fantasitc climate?  :P

To be fair there's always been a much higher average standard of sport climbing on the continent. 17 years ago there were countless unknown French lads climbing 8b when in this country there were maybe 25 (we worked it out once and I'm sure it was around that figure). I suppose the concern if there is any is that we now don't even have 25 people operating at 8c+ which would be a comparative level. This is probably because of the popularity of bouldering compared to sport climbing nowadays and for the major reason for that go to my first sentence.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: IanP on December 09, 2008, 02:01:24 pm
Have endless miles of amazing steep limestone crags and a fantasitc climate?  :P

To be fair there's always been a much higher average standard of sport climbing on the continent. 17 years ago there were countless unknown French lads climbing 8b when in this country there were maybe 25 (we worked it out once and I'm sure it was around that figure). I suppose the concern if there is any is that we now don't even have 25 people operating at 8c+ which would be a comparative level. This is probably because of the popularity of bouldering compared to sport climbing nowadays and for the major reason for that go to my first sentence.

This could actually turn into an interesting and constructive debate if we're not careful!

But despite the weather and the relative lack of rock we do have a decent amount of excellent sport climbing in this country which during the summer (!) weather we seem to get can often be the only place to climb.  And compared with 15 / 20 years ago I'm sure there's load more punters ticking off 7c - 8a+ but this doesn't seem to have happend at the higher grades - it's still a pretty rare event to see 8b+ and above ticked by anyone other than Steve Mac (except Mecca maybe).  Maybe the bouldery nature of the harder routes is partly to blame but as someone who is one of those punters at Malham but who still considers font 7a hard I do find it strange that with all these people operating at font 8a/8b we don't see a lot more hard sport climbing done. 
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: SA Chris on December 09, 2008, 02:20:18 pm
At a guess it was Geoffray de Flaubergeges, or however his name is spelt. Regardless of who he is, the kid is a beast. Neil Mawson was flabbergasted by the casual way he would turn up at the crag, tick a 6c to get warm, onsight an 8a, tick an 8c, go home, repeat.

Cheers for the info Stu, I was just puzzled as to why steve was comparing this kid's sport climbing track record to Dave Mac's when from his post it is quite apparent that it is not DM's sport climbing abilities he is bothered about.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 09, 2008, 04:09:25 pm
hello guys, please take what I said in the way it was intended. Hope you had a good time at Oliana Stu, great cliff. So lads how many Uk climbers have ticked 8C+ in the last year as a matter of interest? It is not  anywhere near 25, is it? I do know and fully acknowledge that Peak 8C+ is desp and take it into consideration. I think this next year is going to be big but unless some of the climbers in britain start really training they are doomed to be big fish in small ponds. And further you canot compare soloing the crux pitch of lets say the Fish with EOTA. Anyway thanks for some of you taking this the right way. I speak for a few, its no secrete, some of them like me have contributed a little to the climbing in britain. Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Stu Littlefair on December 09, 2008, 05:57:29 pm
Have endless miles of amazing steep limestone crags and a fantasitc climate?  :P

I think yes to the first, and no to the second. Places like the Basque have weather which is wetter than ours if anything, and a higher concentration of beasts than anywhere I've ever climbed. They do have lots of amazing steep crags.

I think if we had crags like Oliana, Santa Linya, Tres Ponts, Baltzola, Tarn etc, people would be much more psyched to get very fit. Instead I guess people feel that having the stamina to climb 40m 8c+'s is not that important compared to getting strong enough to 1-5-9 on the small edges. My own personal opinion is people are missing a trick here and the beastliness of the euro-wads is telling us we should be doing much much more volume in our climbing if we want to improve. I'd say that's true of all climbers unless you only boulder, and only on grit.

Stevie - I'd guess that something like 5 or 6 UK climbers have climbed 8c+ this year (Steve Mac, Dave Mac, Ryan Pasquill, Paul Smitton, Stew Watson, other wads?). For 8c I'm not sure the number would go up much, as it's mostly the same climbers, but definitely add Malcom. Looking at Jasper's numbers it seems quite clear that relatively speaking standards have gone backwards, in sport climbing at least.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 09, 2008, 06:16:09 pm
Quote
we should be doing much much more volume in our climbing if we want to improve. I'd say that's true of all climbers unless you only boulder, and only on grit.

You're damn right we should Stu. But I think its as important on grit as it is anywhere else.

Anyone wanna go get a shovel with me?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: cofe on December 09, 2008, 07:30:30 pm
shick-a-ding
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: abarro81 on December 09, 2008, 08:55:09 pm

 My own personal opinion is people are missing a trick here and the beastliness of the euro-wads is telling us we should be doing much much more volume in our climbing if we want to improve. I'd say that's true of all climbers unless you only boulder, and only on grit.


 :off: somewhat I know, but... what about those of us with disproportionate stamina in comparison to my strength? I tend to get on very well with 35m stamina plods in ceuse but struggle at the likes of the tor, or basic stuff indoors. What about stopping strong for power training and the like? Or do you mean I should just go and do even more capiliarisation at the end of my power sessions...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 10, 2008, 10:21:17 am
good morning, perhaps there are a few people who do think that british standards arnt what they should be. Stu mentioned power endurance or probable lac of it, this is interesting and possible. Oh and by the way thanks for the info about only 5 british climbers having done 8c+, a fairly shocking and sad predicament. Can we assume that these 8c+s were all bouldery or were 1 or 2 were power endurance. Do the brits get up their 8c+ by being good strong boulders and try to hang on till the chain or do we have more lads like McClure whos stammina and tecknique look to be of a very high order. Can some people share how these lads train?,  And if people dont wish to expose themselves to undeserved ridicule or critacism, contact me privatly. I would like to know either way but it is more useful to climbers as a group to share info. I notice that the Island has been repeated, by how shall  I put this, a colonial chappie.   
So in the last year, the brits have fielded 6 ish 8c climbers, 5  8C+ climber; 1 9a climber and 1  9a+ climber, In the same time we have fielded no 8c boulderes. Is that about right?
Went running in the the slush and sleet last night, Stevie.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on December 10, 2008, 10:28:25 am
Can some people share how these lads train?,  And if people dont wish to expose themselves to undeserved ridicule or critacism, contact me privatly. I would like to know either way but it is more useful to climbers as a group to share info.

Assuming there is convergence in training methods/styles/approaches utilised by top-end climbers (i.e. certain techniques work and are used by all top climbers) couldn't you get the same information from non-Brit climbers?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 10, 2008, 10:34:25 am
Dear Slack line , I would like to understand if or how the brits train, to add to my knowledge and perhaps other people on the board can benifit. Ramon if I understand every thing correctly, has in the last month or so done the equivalent of all the top 5 british bolt climbers put together, this is staggering; he is 5 foot 2 ins, no excuses. Stevie.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: JC on December 10, 2008, 11:57:35 am
I reckon that the lack of choice of hard routes to go for has something to do with it. This coupled with the fact that a lot of the hard routes have a relatively short time window in which you can get on them before they start seeping again! Maybe a lot of people can be put off by not wanting to put all the work in, just to see the route get wet again just before they do it. It could definately kill the motivation and force people to just go bouldering instead.
Again this comes down to our weather and very unpredictable conditions. Unlike most of the crags in Spain, which don't seep and have 3-star route after route.
I reckon that motivation has to be THE most important asset, for most of our routes anyway!!   :)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: slackline on December 10, 2008, 12:08:54 pm
Cheers Stevie,

If you want to optimise training, surely going for what works best (Ramons training regime which has allowed him to outshine all top 5 british bolt climbers) would be preferable?

Obviously comparing this to those of Brits who aren't achieving as much as these euro-beasts would be beneficial, but without knowing half the equation (i.e. the secret to euro-beastliness) no comparison can be drawn and no real insight gained other than knowing how to get to near the top, but not quite there (a la your dismay at British Standards)?

I guess I'm questioning (again) why you are focusing on brits, but you've already answered that (http://ukbouldering.com/board/index.php/topic,10358.msg172021.html#msg172021).

Apologies for the repetition,

slack (Neil)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: T_B on December 10, 2008, 12:27:33 pm
It's so bleeding obviously to do with the lack of rock in the UK, rather than Brit's overall lack of motivation or potential.

I've been to plenty of French/Spanish crags and am pretty damn sure if they were in my back garden I'd be sport climbing at the very least a grade harder.  It's desperately difficult to train 'proper' stamina here in the UK.  I don't care what people say about how good Kilnsey and Malham are. Yes they are good, but they're not very good for training for the continent. I mean, people call stuff like Zoolook a stamina route when in reality you can sprint it and it's half the length of some of the pitches you get in France/Spain.  We don't have many pockets, nor many tufas to train on, nor nothing that's very steep really if you think about it.

Sure if you have mega motivation you can train it indoors, but it would take someone with an exceptionally high boredom threshold to pull that off.

So trying to compare how we train stamina with the Spanish who are at the crag all year round on 40 metre routes is a bit pointless isn't it?

We've been left behind in sport climbing terms, cos we don't have the facilities. End of story. Personally I think British climbers interested in 'competing' should focus on what we are good at and that is running in it out, on-sight on dodgy rock. We have a good resource in terms of loose, accessible rock.

Or you need to go and live somewhere like Lleida, surely?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Kingy on December 10, 2008, 12:43:00 pm
Spanish crags also seep, it is not just the Tor!

I agree with Stu that the weather in the Basque country is iffy in the winter as well, not just in the UK.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Adam Lincoln on December 10, 2008, 03:22:48 pm
In the same time we have fielded no 8c boulderes. Is that about right?

We fielded Ty. He is an 8c climber.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on December 10, 2008, 03:25:29 pm
Johhny G
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jaspersharpe on December 10, 2008, 03:32:20 pm
How hard is that Singularity thing that Clifford did? Oh and Kheops Assis still gets 8C....
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Andy W on December 10, 2008, 03:53:03 pm


Apart from abroad, the pursuit of new hard problems in the UK seems scarce at the top end. After a quick scan of  http://eliteukbinventory.blogspot.com/ (http://eliteukbinventory.blogspot.com/)  it seems that the hardest problems in the Peak, Yorkshire, N'land, Wales and Scotland were done by Moon, Smith, Gaskins all some years ago.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 10, 2008, 04:02:27 pm
Still snowing, correct me if I am wrong, 8 climbers at 8c, 5 at 8c+, none at 9a, and 1 at 9a+, are we claiming Ty, can we? Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paul B on December 10, 2008, 04:34:23 pm
I may be completely wrong here but I think that a direct comparison between some euro bouldering grades and Brit Font Grades are completely daft.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jim on December 10, 2008, 07:14:14 pm
What has sport climbing got to do with british standards? Do people come to britain to go sport climbing? No, why, because its shit
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: account_inactive on December 10, 2008, 07:18:42 pm
Looking at Lovejoy's list of dispair I've climbed consistently harder abroad than on my own doorstep

What was Dave Grahams ticklist again?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Stubbs on December 10, 2008, 07:22:25 pm
Looking at Lovejoy's list of dispair I've climbed consistently harder abroad than on my own doorstep

What was Dave Grahams ticklist again?

Has all the harder climbing abroad you've done been in between giving lectures on your gypsy lifestyle most nights - no?  ;)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: andy popp on December 10, 2008, 07:24:18 pm
We can add annother 8c+ wad, Tom Bolger today at Santa Linya according to his 8a.nu scorecard.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Ru on December 10, 2008, 07:37:45 pm
We can add annother 8c+ wad, Tom Bolger today at Santa Linya according to his 8a.nu scorecard.

I don't think it's much of a coincidence that Tom has managed this after moving to Spain. In fact is Smitton the only person to have climbed 8c+ in this country this year? (obviously Steve Mac too, but then he repeats an 8c+ almost every time he goes to the Tor so I'm not counting that.)

Put Santa Linya within an hour's drive of central England and you would get an 8c done by a Brit every other weekend of the year (after the first few months to build up the endurance on that style).
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Stu Littlefair on December 10, 2008, 10:27:01 pm
We can add annother 8c+ wad, Tom Bolger today at Santa Linya according to his 8a.nu scorecard.

Psyched for Tom - good effort. That's two 8cs and and 8c+ this year. In answer to jim,my argument is that being better at sport climbing occurs because you are fitter and have more experience of movement over rock than us typical for a British wad.   The question, which remains open as far as I'm concerned is how much this type of training would improve trad and bouldering performance on British crags. The jury is still out on that one.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: north_country_boy on December 11, 2008, 12:22:33 am
Good effort by Tom!!  :thumbsup:Although it has been on the cards for a long time, all he needed, as people have said was the volume of rock/routes and weather to go with it...... Maybe we should all move to Lleida...... maybe then Stevie will be proud to be British

It suppose is no coincidence he lives in the south of France?.....whats wrong with Skipton Stevie?.......oh yeah, as i said above.... ;)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jim on December 11, 2008, 12:51:27 am
There probably is a link there Stu, but the glaringly obvious answer to the question: why hasn't Britain got loads of world class sport climbers; is that Britain hasn't got any world class sport climbing
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 11, 2008, 07:49:53 am
Jim;I am not being wierd but if you read some of the stuff here you might see that not living in lerida is no excuse. the basque region continully produces hords of good climbers, sport, trad,and mountain, despite having weather like north wales. Britain on the other hand has some fantastic sport, yes it does. Raven Tor, much maligned, is brill, some good lines, but lots of nails routes, hard bouldering too. Malham would be a top crag in spain!!!! Gordale is atmospheric and grand, top routes. Kilnsey is top, again a good crag anywhere in the world, with routes to go!!!Wales is ok, some reasonable lime,interesting slate. uk has brilliant climbing walls and a very interesting climbing scene, certainly better than france and spain.
8 at 8c
6  at 8c+
;;;
1 at 9a+
 still an easy two weeks for Ramon.
you know at least its positive its going up, SteviePs NorthCB, Skipton was(maybe still is) a great little spot, market town, lots of fighting after the pub with farmers, caving, fond memories of the grit, some good climbers and boulderes who helped me.Its snowing here havent been able to climb for a while, obviously it will get better, which admittedly is not really evident in uk. 
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Johnny Brown on December 11, 2008, 08:15:28 am
When did you last go to Raven tor Stevie? Its shit, looks comparable to a spanish crag on paper, but not in reality. The belgian lads said it reminded them of the shit crags they have to climb on at home.

Are the spanish crags piss wet most of the year? The uks lack of top sport climbers is entirely down to how uninspiring the climbing is.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: dave on December 11, 2008, 08:38:19 am
raven tor is so unispiring its rammed for the 8 or 9 months of the year that its mainly dry. do the spanish have the pinches wall? do they fuck. i pity them.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Kingy on December 11, 2008, 09:12:12 am
Alex Honnold was full of praise for the mighty Tor. Davey G seemed to quite like it, so much so that he plans to come back and seige all of Steve's 9a's. I don't think he would bother with a shit crag somehow being that he can go anywhere in the world.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 11, 2008, 09:34:26 am
hey , hey , so I did overdo the sauce on Raven Tor. The Snore was very good in the old days for some (not me), it did them , served them, and created some standard very hard routes. Obviouxly my point was Brits have no excuse. Before in the pre-cambrian era of sport climbing, we had, first world champ, at the same time, a quarter of the very good sport climbers were brits, then we had , benidict, a very mean puller who really did something interesting a much better climber than WGGU.Its snowing, dodgy knee, too much running. The basque lads climb an awlful lot indoors. Brits had to travel befor to get some ticks, they can travel now(some do). I have to travel to get easy ticks(spain) but I dont care about easy ticks. All the improvement recently has come from a training mindset and being inspired, you dont need spain for this, it could be a dirty house in S7.  Or it could be some wood north of the border. Its very cheap to travel, its cheap to be thin(hard though), steep sport climbing is safe, anyway you know all this. Was Huffys the only peak based thing apart from Steve macs? Was it horrible and crimpy? Hubble looks really interesting, Mecca is a great line and a bit of bashing british history, amin from the car, could be worse you could live in Reims a still have to win the world title a few times. Good luck with everything, look forward to a great year coming, every body is going to do great things. I have to get on my board and train, but I have fear of my board so am stuck on this one, nightmare? Cant escape,,,,,
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: abarro81 on December 11, 2008, 09:47:36 am
As brilliant as undercut-sloper-jug is, it's not quite like having ceuse on your doorstep though is it.. In fact, I'd trade most of the limestone in the peak for just cascade and berlin sectors. Thinking about going to the tor certainly isn't what motivates me to get off my ass and train.

Anyway, I thought everyone knew the way to big sport numbers usually lies in going to europe for as long as possible? For me and a fair few of my mates, our best grades are almost all from european trips - imagine what would happen if you lived there. Ok, so living there and going on trips isn't comparible - you'd still have to get a job etc instead of climbing every day - but I'd hazard a guess that I'd be climbing a grade or two harder after a year living in a prime euro spot.. I was after 5 weeks in europe this summer.
Stu's point RE: mileage is particularaly relevant here - live in a good spot in europe and you might have 50 good, long 7as near you to go do to build up loads of time on rock and fitness in a little burst at the start of a season on routes.
Here you might have a few short dry ones, then another 10 alright ones 3 hours drive away.. not exactly brilliant for building the onsighting skills and becoming one with the rock.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: SA Chris on December 11, 2008, 09:49:33 am
Thanks Patrul :)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: north_country_boy on December 11, 2008, 11:18:40 am
Anyway, I thought everyone knew the way to big sport numbers usually lies in going to europe for as long as possible? For me and a fair few of my mates, our best grades are almost all from european trips - imagine what would happen if you lived there.

Very true, i've no doubt if I lived in Spain I would up my redpoint grade by maybe 2 grades. And my Onsight grade most definately would be consistently higher......Ive experienced this every time I've been abroad, Germany, France, Spain, Greece etc......

Are the spanish crags piss wet most of the year? The uks lack of top sport climbers is entirely down to how uninspiring the climbing is.

Don't agree with this, there is a lot of inspiring UK sport climbing, Malham and Kilnsey are world class crags, and as Stevie says would be popular in Spain or France etc....

The Groove at Malham? The Thumb at Kilnsey? you rarely get many better 'lines' even abroad.....and Supercool at Gordale is probably the best sport route i have tried anywhere!

The main issue is UK sport climbers have it very hard with conditions and the weather, keeping psyched for weekend trips up to malham to find your project is regularly wet is hard, in fact its f**king demotivating! Yes Spanish crags seep and its sometimes too hot/too cold, but I'd trade conditions any day of the week, not sure i'd necessarily swap Malham and Kilnsey though....

Uk sport climbing doesn't lend itself to Onsighting either mainly due to the lack of volume you can do at one crag.....
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jim on December 11, 2008, 11:59:32 am
To summarize then:
to be a better climber you need to be a better sport climber?
to be a better sport climber you need to live in spain?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Stu Littlefair on December 11, 2008, 12:38:22 pm
To summarize then:
to be a better climber you need to be a better sport climber?
to be a better sport climber you need to live in spain?

Yes/No.

To be a better sport climber you need to want to be a better sport climber. Then you'll do the training needed to be a better sport climber. This is more likely to happen in Spain, but you don't need to live there.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: north_country_boy on December 11, 2008, 12:38:49 pm
To summarize then:
to be a better climber you need to be a better sport climber?
to be a better sport climber you need to live in spain?

Erm, no....

- Sport climbing on Spanish limestone - not going to get you up Hubble

- To climb regularly with reliable conditions - move to Spain

- This will probably lead to better fitness/power endurance, more suited to continental limestone crags - probably lead to climbing harder

I think maybe you have confused the idea of 'better' with 'climbing harder' which is obviously not true is it....... :whistle: ;)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Paz on December 11, 2008, 06:48:48 pm
I've lost the track a bit - but going back a few pages, to those of you who think mileage is the answer (that worked for me last winter - just drop your grade so that you can do the hardest moves possible that you can send in a day)- do you reckon it's important to get that mileage outdoors rather than indoors?  I know A) loads of wall bunnies who probably do a right lot more moves per week than me, but who are frankly shocking outside, B) some who are very good indoors or on euro jugs who would walk all over me indoors anyday, but who I can still compete with (and occasionally beat) outside in the rain (or on nasty slabs Barrows - you punter ;-)), and there's C) a number of odd exception (who I'm bearing in mind as I gradually lose my `bum' status) who work full time, climb indoors most of the time but who are always pretty devastating outside when they hear the call.

Now clearly most of groups A and B may just be shit climbers, and group C may just be really fucking good climbers. 

I think your mileage has to be at a hard enough technical level combined with a lot of rock movement time, and that's what lots of sport routes in condition gives yo, but possibly not so fucking hard that all you do is spend all your time on the dog, on one route.  Just being a very good E5 or E6 climber and coming back to the pub and bragging about the 5c or 6a move you've just done, while being something a lot of us would like to be, is not going to get you better on its own in the long run.  And on indoor routes I guess the moves aren't that hard, but feel hard because you're pumped from having to make a clip every 2 feet.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jim on December 11, 2008, 07:42:03 pm
To summarize then:
to be a better climber you need to be a better sport climber?
to be a better sport climber you need to live in spain?

Yes/No.

To be a better sport climber you need to want to be a better sport climber. Then you'll do the training needed to be a better sport climber. This is more likely to happen in Spain, but you don't need to live there.
Ok then, but all points basically add up to the fact that if you live in the uk your not going to be a world class sport climber unless you have some sort of inhuman motivation.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: r-man on December 12, 2008, 01:48:40 am
Not really that bothered about this from a patriotic perspective - it's great to hear about anybody doing amazing things in our little hobby. But it is interesting to see what different types of climbers different areas produce. The UK does gnarl.

Gaskins has to be the ultimate Brit ambassador - smallest holds, hardest moves. Nevermind climbing arm busting 100m pitches on beautiful rock. Surely, if rock is that nice, it's got to be cheating.

Gaskins did his thing on the bits of rock people weren't meant to climb on. If the legends are to be believed, the rest of world is a long way from reaching the standards set by Shadow Play, Violent New Breed (Stevie, there is another 9a+ in the UK!) and the rest. When will the world catch up?

The Spanish do stamina well, and that's great, but I personally think it's brilliant that many of the younger generation of Brits currently idolise JG's abilities and place his achievements at the pinnacle of physical difficulty. That's what British climbing should be about - proper hard. No messing.

I look forward to seeing who will take the torch, and use it to light up their momentous ascent in a grotty hole with a two move wonder that no one else will ever repeat.




Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Baron on December 12, 2008, 07:36:05 am
Experience experience experience.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 12, 2008, 07:40:53 am
As young Bulger will get hardly any attention for doing something that is fairly note worthy, Id just like to say keep it up and I kook forward to your first 9. Great to hear you are so excited and having such a great time. Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: c.j.d. on December 12, 2008, 08:57:35 am
Wow, seems like there is some psyche coming out of all this - keep it coming, and we'll rename the thread 'British Psyche - Shit or not Shit'.  The answer is 'Not Shit' I think...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Monolith on December 12, 2008, 10:37:37 am
Not really that bothered about this from a patriotic perspective - it's great to hear about anybody doing amazing things in our little hobby. But it is interesting to see what different types of climbers different areas produce. The UK does gnarl.

Gaskins has to be the ultimate Brit ambassador - smallest holds, hardest moves. Nevermind climbing arm busting 100m pitches on beautiful rock. Surely, if rock is that nice, it's got to be cheating.

Gaskins did his thing on the bits of rock people weren't meant to climb on. If the legends are to be believed, the rest of world is a long way from reaching the standards set by Shadow Play, Violent New Breed (Stevie, there is another 9a+ in the UK!) and the rest. When will the world catch up?

The Spanish do stamina well, and that's great, but I personally think it's brilliant that many of the younger generation of Brits currently idolise JG's abilities and place his achievements at the pinnacle of physical difficulty. That's what British climbing should be about - proper hard. No messing.

I look forward to seeing who will take the torch, and use it to light up their momentous ascent in a grotty hole with a two move wonder that no one else will ever repeat.






You write a wonderful polemic Robin.

Stevie, it's somewhat presumptuous of me here but I imagine that you're probably not the most ardent of social network users; to which extent you will have missed out on the Mr. Gaskins appreciation society. I think I speak for a significant number when I say that we really have been host to the greatest (low frequency, high intensity) climber of all time. And if I had

a)The ability to drive and a car
b)Anywhere near the ability
c)Access to a hedge fund for petrol requirements

then I'd be attempting Violent New Breed daily. I personally could not think of a more motivating challenge.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Neil F on December 12, 2008, 11:55:30 am
then I'd be attempting Violent New Breed daily. I personally could not think of a more motivating challenge.

Perhaps it is because I last bouldered in 1983 that I sometimes find myself unable to properly relate to this prevalent sub-culture?  But routes – well they are my bag!

Of course this is a free world, and my view is no more valid or valuable than Monolith’s – indeed in this forum it will be probably carry much less weight.

But I must confess, even if I was 20x stronger (or is it 200x?), then I still wouldn’t be attempting Violent New Breed on a daily basis.  In fact I wouldn’t be attempting it at all, because for me, I could not think of a less motivating challenge! (Though I have climbed on the crag, and the setting is quite beautiful).

Give me a sustained, 40m wall of perfect Spanish limestone any day.

Good job we’re a broad church…..

Neil
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: BenF on December 12, 2008, 12:10:10 pm
Of course this is a free world, and my view is no more valid or valuable than Monolith’s – indeed in this forum it will be probably carry much less weight.

Nah, no-one listens to Monolith.   ;)   His idea of a great line usually includes rules and eliminates the decent holds in favour of some dirty, dirty crimps. 

PS: I love you really Tom.  Do you want a lift up to try Violent New Breed then?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: grimer on December 12, 2008, 12:19:52 pm
I'm afraid I'm in the NeilF / Johnny Brown camp when it comes to worshipping Gaskins' idols. If VNB was a F7a+ instead of 9a+, and it was in Cheedale, i doubt i would bother trying it. I realise this might be considered blasphemy.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: BenF on December 12, 2008, 12:25:41 pm
I'm afraid I'm in the NeilF / Johnny Brown camp when it comes to worshipping Gaskins' idols.

You'll be saying that Woodwell isn't the best crag in the UK next...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Monolith on December 12, 2008, 12:36:45 pm
It's an open church Grimer. You are forgiven for your sins.

Neil - It isn't a case of privilege of opinion. Your perspective is equally as justifiable as mine or the next person's and I can see why you wouldn't be inspired by VNB.

I love you also Ben but you'd do better off giving that lift to Mr Danny Cattell; an individual who has invested more time than most in attempting a repeat of a specific problem.

Perhaps there are a few people out there with the right genetics, training ethic and corresponding motivation levels to wage themselves against this legacy? I can't say I can name many but to anyone of a similar mindset as myself, a repeat of one or more of these problems would surely be a career aspiration?
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: moose on December 12, 2008, 01:02:40 pm
Gaskins did his thing on the bits of rock people weren't meant to climb on. If the legends are to be believed, the rest of world is a long way from reaching the standards set by Shadow Play, Violent New Breed (Stevie, there is another 9a+ in the UK!) and the rest. When will the world catch up?

Out of interest, have any climbers nominally capable of success ever actually tried any of the hardest Gaskins problems?  Has anyone of the stature of a Landman, Smith, Chris Davies, Moon (or even a migratory Graham) offered a considered opinion on their difficulty?  Has anyone with a few ft8b ticks to their credit looked at Il Pirata, VNB, Shadow Play etc and come away with bleeding fingers and a stunned expression? 

I only ask because I fear that Gaskins' self-effacing brilliance is such an attractive concept that my desire to believe is making too much of half-remembered hearsay.  What is the actual, recorded opinion of the truly learned: are his problems "merely" cutting edge, accurately graded V15s, or are they really the heinous entities that we all hope for?  The romantic in me desperately wants problems to exist that are so far beyond the present cutting-edge that only paradigm shifts, rather than gradual improvements, will provide the second ascents. 

I dream of a far-future gathering in a South Lakes pit where a lab-spawned spiderboy, surrounded by Ready Brek style glow, and trained since birth with a campus-board mounted on the maternal bosum, pulls on with such ferocity that the rock fuses under his fingers.... but is still found wanting by the past standards of the shiny headed master.  This desire for Gaskins-pr0n is not for any patriotic reasons, but because I feel that the knowledge and awareness of something special enhances all of our lives... and I still have designs on a W.W.G.D? t-shirt...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: dave on December 12, 2008, 01:37:25 pm
i think most people blanket dismiss gaskins stuff as shit so it spares them having to try it. I've certianly never heard of anyone seriously trying the harder stuff. i mean katz and others have done isla de encanta but that must be a fair distane off the top gaskinisms now. you certinaly don't even see anyone really trying the brandenburg gate project either.

I think one person who would be the numbero one candidate for looking the fuck at gaskins creations is dave graham. at least he's know if they were ballpark for v15s. if he does come back to the U of K then someone should drive him up there to try em. I volunteer cofe to drive.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: cofe on December 12, 2008, 01:46:58 pm
only if he agrees to go get a shovel with me.

Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Somebody's Fool on December 12, 2008, 01:50:47 pm
Sssshick-a-dink.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Monolith on December 12, 2008, 03:03:35 pm
Thinking further...

It's a shame that the public perception of the upper echelons of climbing ability is symbolised by "that spiderman who climbs up buildings all the time. You know, the guy who looks like Iggy Pop crossed with Crocodile Dundee".

If only the VNB ascent had been captured in glorious technicolour.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: moose on December 12, 2008, 04:26:43 pm
It's a shame that the public perception of the upper echelons of climbing ability is symbolised by "that spiderman who climbs up buildings all the time.
If only the VNB ascent had been captured in glorious technicolour.

Just imagine footage of Gaskins being broadcast on Look North or North West Tonight.  Local news presenters, more used to "cat up tree; cat rescued" reportage, having to confront a terrifying new definition of physical excellence and gimlet-eyed focus.  I can almost see the stunned looks, feel the awkward shifting on the sofa, and hear the nervous laughter as they attempt to dismiss a scene whose importance they sense, but cannot understand.  The watching public's relief once it's over: the world is now safely back within its normal parameters, now they can return to their normal lives, unburdened by any further insight into humanity's potential.  Only the fused pixels of their televisions would bear lasting witness to the power.... a shaven, cadaverous head forever imposed on Coronation Street. 

Alternatively VNB would be dismissed by the public as not being as high as that building the french chap climbed, and the host would talk about a terrifying charity abseil they once did. 

Re Dave's idea that a visting DG should be pointed at the lowest crags the Lakes has to offer.  Alternatively, can't an eccentric millionaire fund / kidnap Gaskins (depending on his willingness) for a tear-up of the USA: Hueco, Buttermilks, RMNP etc.  I reckon a flash of Jade would constitute sufficient "collateral form" to judge difficulty of his Lakes portfolio.  Just imagine the DVD of the trip... it'd be like Rampage but with modest muttering instead of stoned games of slaps.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Ru on December 12, 2008, 04:43:16 pm
Plus, I reckon that the general public would be a little confused as to why he tied himself off to a tree first. 
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on December 12, 2008, 05:45:19 pm
I'm afraid I'm in the NeilF / Johnny Brown camp when it comes to worshipping Gaskins' idols. If VNB was a F7a+ instead of 9a+, and it was in Cheedale, i doubt i would bother trying it. I realise this might be considered blasphemy.
Hmmm, I think it looks like pretty nice rock for UK limestone, in that great photo in the Yorkshire limestone guide.

Okay Il Pirata looks disgraceful but some of the rest don't look too bad...
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: GCW on December 12, 2008, 10:21:04 pm
Walk Away SDS is a cool line on a cool bit of rock.
Shadow Play is just mental.
Il Pirata would be classic if it was a bit farther off the ground/ not in a hole.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 13, 2008, 03:43:05 pm
listen up, Gasget appreciation society, take it somewhere else, this is the chuffing section, not the I do really ugly short boulders and believe in god club. God alone knows why anyone would choose to do a route in such odd (to say the least) style, VNB is also horrible and could be patioed out and be done in a modern high ball style, so get going. And we are talking top standards this year.
It would be cool if some one put there twopennys worth in re grades in lets say Santa linya verses the mighty Tor. All I know about peak lime is its fooking hard, always tricky and has condition dependent holds. On the other hand spanish routes do seem easier on the crux but will certainly have more continuity and a more phisical element, can anybody else chime in?Thats why I wanted to know which route Huffy did. Oh yes, Monolith the Iggy/ Crocdundee guy, was certainly stronger than 95% of the punters on this board and bolder than99% , a bit of respect, remember he does not use mats under those high rise rabbit warrens, and frequently gets beaten up, much worse than doing grit E10 or E11. Good training to you all, Stevie
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Ru on December 13, 2008, 05:44:17 pm
.
It would be cool if some one put there twopennys worth in re grades in lets say Santa linya verses the mighty Tor.

When I was there about 2 years ago the grades were all over the place. Some were spot on, some hard, some soft. Some were very overgraded (mostly in the 8b-c range, the easier stuff had been repeated enough to have settled down I think). Certainly some of the original 8cs dropped to about 8b, but conversely there were 2 or 3 short bouldery 8a+s that I thought were every bit as hard as their short, bouldery peak contemporaries at the Tor. But they were steeper, on much bigger holds and were not as conditions dependent. Same with some of the harder stuff. Steve Mac did La Nueva Ola, 8c+, when we were there. He thought it was the same grade as Evolution (which is given 8c/+), but with the obvious difference that it was dry about 50% longer during the year and didn't need primo conditions to do most of the moves. Another very useful aspect of the place is that most of the harder routes have about 3 lower offs. So if you drop the last move of your 8c+ project, you've still ticked the 8c that finished 10m lower. Or conversely, if you have done your 8c project you know that all you have to do to climb 8c+ is put in another few weeks training on the circuits and then add on another 8a section above the 8c you have dialled.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Monolith on December 13, 2008, 05:53:57 pm
Stevie, I don't suggest that any man that can one finger one arm a pocket is weak but he's not our Lord is he? After all, you do want to talk about the BEST don't you?

As for highballing VNB, good idea. Capable (?) people should get to it.


Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: stevie haston on December 14, 2008, 08:53:43 am
 :)thanks Ru for that info, Iam not sure that people understand that Spain also has correctly graded routes to. I always thought there were two problems in spain, everything felt much easier in the cold and there was too much wacky backy about, make that three, theyalso get so excited that hey the routes have to be harder. There are also alternate grades available but often (naturally) people take the bigger tick. I would like to add (not dictate of course) that although I think grades are a very dependant thing they are the only way of keeping track of things, so its a dirty job but some one has to do it. Boux is were it started and they should always be kept in mind, problem there is the new mega route 50 meters big holds doesnt really exsist at boux. There is a topic on bouldering grades on routes(kingy) and it shows(I think) how just a few arbitray other moves throw a spanner in the grading game. Other thing is font grades are font grades not swiss, brutish things are often given surprisingly low grades without something subtle added. Anyway good luck training, another 8 inches of snow and I am feeling stagnant, Stevie.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: account_inactive on December 14, 2008, 04:50:26 pm
wacky backy  ;D
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: GraemeA on December 19, 2008, 06:14:14 pm
I have heard mention (over on Cocktalk) of a decrepit 52 year old Brit recently doing an 8c+. Anyone have any details? Have you heard about this Stevie  ;)
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Kingy on December 19, 2008, 06:31:23 pm
Fantastic effort Stevie! Amazing work, there is hope for us yet!!  :thumbsup:
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Pantontino on December 19, 2008, 06:38:05 pm
Descent en Enfer at Grotte de Sabart in Ariege I understand.

http://www.v12outdoor.com/catalog/index.php/ (http://www.v12outdoor.com/catalog/index.php/)

Astonishing effort - all those thousands of pull ups must have worked!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: cowboyhat on January 28, 2009, 01:25:23 pm
With hindsight this thread should have been called,

'At 52 I'm about to climb 8c+ which puts me in the top five British sport climbers. Are you all shit or just really lazy?'



Well done for keeping it under your hat Stevie. All those pull-ups and no one suspected a thing.
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Jaspersharpe on January 28, 2009, 01:27:09 pm
 :lol:
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Doylo on January 28, 2009, 04:08:45 pm
Was just bored lookin through old posts when i found this from Mr Haston:

There are beasts in Britain just like in most places, but why(Paul B) cant we have beasts who can boulder, do multi pitch, and do the occaisional run out route. I am sorry but if I could boulder as hard as some of you lot, I would have been straight on Rhapsody laughing my head off and willingly taking falls.

Stevie how do you expect someone who primarily boulders to be fit enough to climb a 40? metre 8c+ trad route? Being strong won't get you up that. In fact i'd say you were much more qualified having actually climbed 8c+ (good effort btw). You know how to handle a run-out more than most too- come on get yourself to Dumbarton!  ;)
Maybe your the man to sort out British standards- E11 at 52!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: Fiend on January 28, 2009, 08:47:46 pm
^^^ Good gauntlet!
Title: Re: British standards, shit or not shit?
Post by: tallsop on October 03, 2009, 09:02:43 pm
I respect them,, but theyre not for me, theyre slowing us down in my view. time to catch these european types up!
SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal