UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => news => Topic started by: uptown on July 09, 2006, 02:55:37 pm
-
Crazy Legs Crome 7c - The under Rumsfeld to Fat punter link at Whitehouses. Classic, and with a mandatory 360 degree spin to join the finish.
-
Nice one yoooooot! Looks great. I love feet first stuff. Found feet first solutions to three or four problems in Oz, but can't think of any examples over here.
-
There's a roof at Goldsborough Carr that climbs very much like this. Not sure if it's a complete 360° turn, but it's still rad.
-
which one? i cant seem to think of any that you end up turning 360 on?
-
Not the best guy to ask, only been there once. Some weird moves walking feet round a lip to some twisty stuff then up face/arete.
Could be you climb it differently...maybe... it's very footy.
-
George's Roof perchance?
-
Visited Goldsborough Carr lately, waht a beautiful spot. A great companion to Slipstones, just as good with different style climbing (although with my brittle knees, I didn't do all that much). Would this be the best bouldering above grass in the UK?
-
Not for long now you've said that...
I'd submit Oldridge pinnacle as the current grass champ.
-
While I'd like to imagine my words carried enough weight to precipitate mass environmental destruction...
-
Sounds like a fair swap to me. Deal
-
No, George's Roof at Goldsborough. Different kettle of ball games altogether.
-
How about a My Buddy the Apple (best 7c highball in the peak) for a Coco Team Special/Crucifix or other suitable neo classic yorks highish 7c.
-
I suspect you'll not find the 360° spin you're looking for, but Georges' Roof might be cool enough regardless.
Goldsborough Carr - great place to have your ashes scattered.
They're hard to remember, problems of great oddity, can't think of any more spins. But I can recall turning over/around a feature and ending up with my back to the wall with palms facing behind me, then turning out again on the next move.
-
what about that higginson Teck crack Direct thing on the lower tier. Don't you hook the slopers with your toes?
-
Oh yeah, Thud 7b isn't it? Mad move. I did it by jumping off ground into the upsidedown position, I imagine it would be desperate if you pulled on normally then tried to invert.
-
Oh yeah, Thud 7b isn't it? Mad move. I did it by jumping off ground into the upsidedown position, I imagine it would be desperate if you pulled on normally then tried to invert.
You're supposed to start it by pulling on with your feet on the back wall.... It can be started from matched on the undercuts under the roof, but this is not to be recommended as they are fragile. You can just campus off the dish too, which is how I do it, saving all the upside down faff.
-
That'll explain why it felt soft :-\
-
Is a 360 necessary on any of the toms roof problems at stoney?
Nope. You would probably do several if you fell out of it though.
-
http://bleau.info/isatis/602.html
-
http://bleau.info/isatis/602.html
Tried the 7c end section of this. Managed the upside down crazy legs bit, but found the sandy rockover/mantle bit after that horrendous!
-
So it seems the crazy legs might be unique?
I've seen someone do it on a sport route, and I'm pretty sure some boulder problem at Hueco or somewhere.
-
The last bit of Thormens Moth has got one.
-
the 360 spin is at the end of the sit section, before the grovel top. It is a good move.
-
Apparently Witness The Fitness has 360 spins in it...
(http://www.wspinanie.pl/serwis/200504/19sharma.jpg)
-
this is almost 360, but it's not quite what you were after:
http://bleau.info/isatis/1545.html (http://bleau.info/isatis/1545.html)
-
Isn't there also some 360 action on Rampage? At a big low limestone-esque roof Sharma spins and leads with his feet around the lip (also doing a funky bit of hands-off resting).
-
Indeed there is, that crazy leg jam thing...
-
do most other people realise that a 360 is made up of 2 180's, not just 1. the 2 180's must also go in the same plane
-
I think they know what they mean :spank:
-
I think this one illustrates the point http://bleau.info/isatis/549.html (http://bleau.info/isatis/549.html) (2nd vid down from the top) (it's actually a 180, and then reverse 180)
-
do most other people realise that a 360 is made up of 2 180's, not just 1. the 2 180's must also go in the same plane
I don't understand, it's all too compilcated, please explain. :-\
And what's that about getting in a plane?
-
He means that to spin and put ones feet where ones hands where would be a 180 not a 360. I dont get the planes thing either.
-
maybe one of those big tin birds I keep seeing overhead but can't see how its connected with climbing or 360's
-
"I ain't getting on no plane, foo!"
-
the 2 180's must also go in the same plane
i know what you mean "not so dense after all"...
-
It is easy to see what our good man 'High Mass to Volume Ratio' means (although he has been less precise than he thinks). That is, if you spin your feet above your hands that's a 180, and to complete the 360 you are required to do another 180 in the same direction of rotation. If you go back again the same way you have done a, erm, 0 I suppose!
He said the same plane, which is also true, as you could can of doing a "vertical" 180 a la the toe-hook beta on that Font double dyno, followed by a "horizontal" 180 i.e. from facing the rock to facing out. Since these would be in perpendicular planes, you have not done a true 360. Indeed, if you did end up doing these contortions in consecutive moves I don't know what you would call it? Probably a transformation :whistle:
-
Probably a joint dislocation :whistle:
-
Dense means that you've got to go 360 round in one direction, not 180, then 180 back the same way. It's a valid point.
-
Dense means that you've got to go 360 round in one direction, not 180, then 180 back the same way. It's a valid point.
So does that mean, Pu, that if I do a 180 anti-clockwise (on a horizontal plane), but then do the other 180 clockwise, I haven't actually done a 360, notwithstanding that the latter was also executed on a horizontal plane. Holyshit batman, my brain hurts. :-\
-
no, youve done a 180 and reversed it. Although you've actually moved over a modulus of 360 degrees the overall resultant amount of movement is zero; you haven't actually moved anywhere relative to your origin.
180 degrees - 180 degrees = 0 degrees
;)
actually although both Ru and Dense are correct they have quoted the two equally valid but different things, perhaps unwittingly!?
Ru is correct you cant claim a 360 for doing a 180 clockwise then a 180 anti clockwise, the simple concept.
Dense's means that you cant do 180 horizontally and then do 180 degrees vertically (a bizarre concept but possible i guess) and claim a 360. He should have said that both 180s must be in the same direction and plane to be 360. I suspect dense meant what Ru said, but i don't ever underestimate what goes on in that man's head.
Confused now? :lol:
-
no, youve done a 180 and reversed it. Although you've actually moved over a modulus of 360 degrees the overall resultant amount of movement is zero; you haven't actually moved anywhere.
180 degrees - 180 degrees = 0 degrees
;)
I have moved the exactly the same distance (about 6ft) as I would have moved had I executed the second 360 movement in an anti-clockwise direction (just like the first movement). I just spun rightwards instead of leftwards. Still 360. And go easy on the -ve Karma, I'm just confused :beer1:
-
Ok, what you qouted is the modulus, the absolute value.
If i travel four miles from my house and travel four miles back to my house, how far from my house am I? 0 miles
If i travel four miles from my house and then another four miles from my house, how far from my house am I? 8 miles
Its the same principle but just in different form. Everything in the world dense initially described needs to have two components, direction and distance.
Its equal to the critical difference between speed and velocity. Probably the most important basic physics concept.
completely :off:
-
I suspect dense meant what Ru said, but i don't ever underestimate what goes on in that man's head.
I presumed that when Dense said 'plane' he meant 'direction', even though I'm aware they mean different things. If you start climbing a flat surface in the conventional manner (feet towards the floor, facing the surface) and spin 180 in two orthogonal planes you would end up upside down and facing out.
-
What a lot of nonsense everyone is talking. Brilliant, I'll join in!
no, youve done a 180 and reversed it. Although you've actually moved over a modulus of 360 degrees the overall resultant amount of movement is zero; you haven't actually moved anywhere relative to your origin.
I think you'll find that doing a 360 entails a net rotation of precisely nothing. You're back in the same place you started. That's the whole point. And yes, I realise you're trying to say you've just gone back on yourself, but wouldn't it be easier if you used simpler words...
;)
Now a 360 in the vertical plane - that would be wierd. Maybe in some awful hanging crack offwidth thing?
p.s. The problem does look good. I for one would love to see the video...
-
Now a 360 in the vertical plane - that would be wierd. Maybe in some awful hanging crack offwidth thing?
Not sure about full 360 but they do seem to do these 180 'kick through' moves on offwidths in the States. I remember seeing a pic of this guy on a route 'Belly Full of Badberries', upside down climbing it feet first.
We have loads of routes here requiring a 180 turn and feet-first exits, this one ,Chaos & Disorder, being one of the best:
(http://www.mitchleblanc.com/images/climbing/037/P9242418.jpg)
-
There's some tiny roof in Portland that I tried a few weeks ago. Supposed to be one of the best V6s or 7s on the boulderfield. I struggled and eventually gave up, deciding it was bloody hard for the grade. Only later I found out the trick was to start feet first. Damn. It feels like losing at cards to a cheater.
-
Its equal to the critical difference between speed and velocity. Probably the most important basic physics concept.
After Gravity, JR!
-
When I said
I don't understand, it's all too compilcated, please explain.
And what's that about getting in a plane?
I was joking, as I thought it was pretty obvious.
I understood exactly what Dense meant, pretty much what Ru has said above. I've spent enough time in a terrain park to understand these concepts. Never meant to spark a hot debate.
-
Now a 360 in the vertical plane - that would be wierd. Maybe in some awful hanging crack offwidth thing?
Ray's Roof? Although its not totally vertical, I think it's in one plane.
-
Its equal to the critical difference between speed and velocity. Probably the most important basic physics concept.
After Gravity, JR!
Bit chicken and egg that tho! You wouldn't understand gravity without vectors though I guess you wouldnt be here to understand either without gravity. Anyway, Newton, bit of a wad for "discovering" both things in question.
Back to the topic...
-
2 pages of discussion about 360's. genius :thumbsup:
-
how about just multiples of 180's either in a plane or on a rock
-
Classic, and with a mandatory 360 degree spin to join the finish.
Maybe not after all......
I saw a way without the spin today but it didn't feel like an easier option to me.
-
Was that your car(s) I passed at Whitehouses on Sunday morning? I suspected a bit of pre-heat Crazy Legs action might be happening. I went on to Guisecliff myself... got scratched to buggery and soaked to the skin wading uphill through damp, neck-deep ferns and falling over a lot.... a lot like my saturday at Carrock Fell (apart from that involved added scree to make the falling over parts more painful).
-
Was that your car(s) I passed at Whitehouses on Sunday morning?
Aye, bit warm though, be there again tomorrow am - drop in if you're passing.
got scratched to buggery and soaked to the skin wading uphill through damp, neck-deep ferns and falling over a lot....
Hmmm, I did that too a few weeks ago - have decided to leave it alone 'til autumn now.
-
Just came across a font clip and remembered the 360 degree silliness/exuberant celebration of kinaesthetic extremes in this thread. There's a lot of shuffling going on here, but near the end, Monsieur Godoffe executes the sort of move we've come to expect from his climbingworks problems...
http://bleau.info/plaines/13291.html
-
Silky skills from the ginga one, impressive stuff
-
I can Concur with Bonjoy (hello btw!) that the end top out to Insoluble d'etre roof thing is nails, esp when you been crimpin the shit out of holds along the way.
But seriously though guys, how much 360 fun can you actually get on the rock, maybe 2 seconds? Why not see the light, sack of the rock and buy one of these instead
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IG-MBDciDIA
-
I have, in the past, actually 'gone around' on myself. This involved the removal of my two lower left hand ribs and flexibility lessons from the Green Goddess. Having found this reasonably painful, I deemed it a good idea to stick to tail whips on my BMX. :whistle:
-
ITS YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(http://www.revolutionbike.com/HUFFY-STAR.jpg)