[fried]

At least with the Font system there ARE lower grades, with the V system you get down to V0 (which apparently can be anything from about 4 to 6A) and that's it.

Which is the grades that 'most' people boulder at in Font.

[SA Chris]

Quite a few Seppo vids even use Font grades recently.

Offwidth - fair enough if "punters" like the opposite, and may outnumber "us" and buy more guides, but as far as I can see this website is not a commercial venture, so your argument is moot.

It's a database that has been compiled by boulderers for boulderers.

[r-man]

Thanks for all the feedback - it's great that the site is getting used. Gareth has done a great job getting it to this point, and entering the data has taken a decent chuck of time (days and weeks? it took us a bit longer than that, Andy!). Thanks to everyone else who has joined in.

We aren't going to switch to V grades, so lets stop that discussion. Gareth did mention he could create a conversion switch to flick between v and font grades, but this is pretty low down on the list of things to do!

Drop down menus might be one way to speed up page navigation, and prioritising what features to show on the home page is another issue - but these are mostly to do with Gareth having enough time. He has done lots of work on functionality and implementing a whole host of features that aren't immediately obvious, and hopefully with enough input from the community, will become really useful in the future.

It might be useful if I explain what the site is trying to achieve, so that people are encouraged to contribute. The site isn't just a database of problem names and grades - it also collects information about the attributes of those problems (eg. slopey, crimpy, dynamic, stays dry), about when and how the problems was ascended (useful in the future for showing what period is optimum to climb the problem, which problems are commonly flashed etc), and about grade opinions (the mean grade is shown). This means that you can search for slopey 7a's on grit, or pumpy limestone problems from 6b - 7b that stay dry in the rain. But for this to work, we need people to register their ascents and give their opinions. The more data the site accumulates, the more useful it is for everyone.

So if you like the site and find it useful, one way to say thanks is to register some ascents.

A big thanks to everyone who has already submitted info or media.

Some stats that might be interesting, and some pages that peeps might like to browse:
There are currently around 3400 problems in the database. http://peakbouldering.info/problems
Roughly 900 photos and 400 videos. http://peakbouldering.info/photos - http://peakbouldering.info/videos
- Photos are really useful when trying to find a problem at a crag, so please add photos, especially photos of less famous problems.

For those struggling to find the advanced search function - it's currently (perhaps badly) named "build a ticklist", in the top right.
If you just want to get to a crag, boulder or problem, type the name into the quick search box.

If you want the classic bleau/yg view, click "view all problems" when you have got to the crag you are interested in.

Right, have to go, hollow mountain is 20min hence...

[Offwidth]

Just to be clear, if I was running the site I'd use font grades (although my priority for the V grade convertor may be higher). On the point of mistakes there are known mistakes in most published work, then there are the 'mistakes' that are really disagreements
(most grade differences).

My earlier advice (maps, V grade, IE, etc) assumes the site wants to become more widely used (ie become the main database for peak bouldering); as a specialist site 'by keen boulderers for keen boulderers' it's already fine. Moving to the former from the later may not be a good idea and may not work.

On another point , Font vs V, there ARE grades below V0, they are called UK tech grades and if you are really desperate there are U grades. Having a grading system that is meaningless (like sub 6 in font) is helping no-one. The BMC choice wasn't Font vs V, it was: (Font and UK tech) vs (V and Uk tech).

[fried]

On another point , Font vs V, there ARE grades below V0, they are called UK tech grades and if you are really desperate there are U grades. Having a grading system that is meaningless (like sub 6 in font) is helping no-one.

I thought the grades below VO wer VB and VO-. I would strongly disagree that bouldering grades below 6 are meaningless in Font, although when I first started climbing there I used to convert back to English tech grades it soon became pointless as it stops giving enough information in the font 4-5 range. I also believe that if we say that F4a corresponds roughly to English 5a then Font grades in Font are O.K ish. The problem in comparison with indoor/ other areas in France is that F4c, probably an English 5b move in there somewhere is a juggy slab outside of Fontainebleau.

[Offwidth]

I've spent a few months in total low grade bouldering in font. I've done most of the yellow and about half of the orange ciruits climbed 3's that are UK 5c and 6a's that are UK 5c. Font 4a avearges out at about UK tech 5a for the hardest move but can be sustained at that grade when others can be a single 4b move or on others a single 6a move. The grades are all over the shop and its nothing much to do with tricks or skill but a lot to do with polish and pof and the reluctance of locals to change grades. Its obviously possible to sort this out by regrading but anyone claiming they understand low grade font grading from font must be mistaken. I've also climbed problems given font 4 in Uk guides that would be unpolished honest 2 in the forest.

[Johnny Brown]

To be honest Steve I think you're the only person involved with guides who has much of an idea what a font 4 should feel like. I certainly haven't.

[JamieG]

I don't want to tread on toes, but in my experience generally low grade problems are harder to grade regardless of the system used. I think the reason for this is, that the abilities of people at lower grades tends to be more variable. I.e. some people are naturally strong but not very good at balancing or being flexible and vice versa. Whereas as you move up the grades problems to to require you have a more homogenised set of skills (strong fingers, good technique, a streak of sadomasochism etc). Therefore problems tend to be easier to grade.

Disclaimer: Haha, this is clearly not true. Look at the ridiculous length some discussions about grades of hard problems go to. And also many climbers of all abilities feel they have a style that suits them.

Sorry a bit off topic.

On topic. Peakbouldering.info is really impressive and is likely to only get better with time and input. Sterling effort.

[Offwidth]

To be honest Steve I think you're the only person involved with guides who has much of an idea what a font 4 should feel like.

Lynn, Simon,  Andy L, Simmo, Reuben, Ropeboy, Fiend....... its a continuum not a gap, as we move away from our limit the sensitivities drop but I'd put money on even you being able to find one of the juggier orange elephant 3c's a lot easier than the polished, once juggy, Bas Cuvier 2a's.

[Johnny Brown]

I'd put money on even you being able to find one of the juggier orange elephant 3c's a lot easier than the polished, once juggy, Bas Cuvier 2a's.

Its a deal - the bet's on! How much? And, just to be clear, we're basing this entirely on my judgement?

[highrepute]

  who let this thread get highjacked by the grade debaters?

I think peakbouldering.info is a great. The initial problems that I noticed seem to be have ironed out over time.
plus points
+the photo, video pop up box.
+the external video hosting.
+the build a ticklist will be great when the site has more ascents logged
+it's becoming my first port of call for problem descriptions and info

areas for improvement
-although you can log climbs you can't see your ticklist (intentional?)
-a bit slow sometimes (already covered above I know)
-think a few additional options for the properties might be useful, mainly for the aspect, such as>>

Lowball
Good landing
Shaded (as opposed the sheltered which I assume means from wind rather than sun)

[Offwidth]

I'd put money on even you being able to find one of the juggier orange elephant 3c's a lot easier than the polished, once juggy, Bas Cuvier 2a's.

Its a deal - the bet's on! How much? And, just to be clear, we're basing this entirely on my judgement?

Yes, whatever isn't silly (honour before gain), yes.

Incidently some of the obscure yellow and orange circuits give an indication of what things used to be like before the polish...same size holds... much easier... grades make sense.

[Bonjoy]

Spotted something on pb.info yesterday that I reckon could do with tweaking.
Currently when a problem is added, the original grade given doesn’t count as a grade vote. Therefore whatever grade is given by the first logged ascent becomes the main documented grade for the problem. There is a note on the individual problems page stating what grade it was given originally but this doesn’t appear elsewhere.
It seems daft that an established grade, which is likely to be either the product of various people’s opinions over time, or the opinion of a first ascentionist logging a new problem, are overridden by the vote of one repeat ascent regardless of how far off the consensus that vote might be.
Obviously this is mostly an issue due to it being early days and not many people logging ascents yet. However, even if logging ascents on pb becomes commonplace there will always be obscure bits an pieces which could have their grade changed at random in this way.
I think a good way round this would be to have the given grade remain as the default grade until a set number (three or four maybe) of ascents have been logged, at which point the voter average becomes the default. Or if this is too complex to implement, at the very least have the original given grade count as a vote.
BTW the example which brought this to mind was Corner Arete (called Alcove Nose in Froggatt guide) http://peakbouldering.info/problems/581 at Gardom’s North. Originally entered at 6b+ (and IMO no pushover at that, it used to get B9 in the first bouldering guide!) one vote for 6a+ means it is now listed as 6a+. At current rates of logging it will take a long time before it’s back to being listed at an accurate grade.

[lagerstarfish]

I need to get voting so's I can pretend to be a 7c boulderer for a day....

[account_inactive]

Would it not be better to just have both grades next to each other

It would then be obvious looking at the number of ascents as to what was going on

[tomc]

BTW the example which brought this to mind was Corner Arete (called Alcove Nose in Froggatt guide) http://peakbouldering.info/problems/581 at Gardom’s North. Originally entered at 6b+ (and IMO no pushover at that, it used to get B9 in the first bouldering guide!) one vote for 6a+ means it is now listed as 6a+. At current rates of logging it will take a long time before it’s back to being listed at an accurate grade.
[/quote]

Sorry that was me - was just getting to grips with how it worked - and had a nice photo of it aswell.  Unless I was doing it wrong it was a pull on and slap up and grovel over the top.....didnt realise it was a public grade consensus straight away - thought it would stick to the original until it had some more grades added.  It still maintains the current guidebook grade underneath - but I guess they could just be switched round?
B9 - still B9 for the sitter?
Can I ammend it for other peoples sake....?

[Bonjoy]

It can be done a couple of way including pull on and slap. Whether you pull on from the ground underneath or off a boulder on the right affects the difficulty a little. Personally I think it's fair at 6b+. You’re entitled to your opinion on the grade. There’s nowt wrong with voting for whatever grade you think something is. People entering ascents shouldn't have to moderate their views to compensate for any peculiarities of the site. The problem (at least I think it’s a problem) is the way the site then changes the grade base on just one vote.
As I said before, yes the original grade is shown on the problem page, but it is not shown elsewhere - on any photos/video, on the summary page for the boulder, as part of any search for probs of a particular grade, any other searches, or on ascent logs. Essentially the original grade instantly becomes a footnote only on one location within the whole site.

Re the sitter – see the recent thread about Neil’s Roof at Gardom’s. As far as I can tell, at the moment it’s an unknown quantity without an agreed line, grade or any known of ascents.

[tomc]

Was there for a night session - marks roof was soaking so had to look elsewhere....really didnt think that the overall grade would take a hit. I checked out some of the neils roof thread - "i was that idiot" so didnt reply

starting without stepping in from right was okay if you're flexible enough - getting the second hold was harder than going for top.

.... this system will work for oft visited problems and areas - but a rethink/reprogramme required for less traveled stuff.

just answering the call for more people to get onboard!!

do pics that are uploaded need to be a certain size???

 

[Bonjoy]

Sorry Tom. That was an unfair comment from me and i'll delete it. You piss the prob in that video and I'm not surprised you thought it was only 6a+.
My frustration was with the way the site uses the opinions fed in not so much with the opinions per se.

[Duma]

Been logging some of the stuff I did in the last week and had some comments:

1] The 8 billion different "attributes" for each problem really need to be further down the page, certainly below the grade vote breakdown. They're handy if you're searching for types of problem, building a ticklist etc, but of secondary importance once you're on the page - hopefully there'll generally be pics or video by then for most stuff.

2] The big issue as i see it is that the site relies on folk registering their ascents to improve as a resource, but it's not really happening at the moment - for example the nose and breakfast have got 5 ascents each, seems unlikely that more of the sites users have not done these - so why aren't the ascents on there? I think it's that people aren't 'rewarded' as such for registering their ascents - the obvious way would be to allow users to see what they've done via their profile something like on bleau.info (HALAM, or HALA JB), sounds petty, but I like looking at what I've done, and I guess others may too?

3] I changed the description for Neil's/Nigel's Roof as what was there seemed very confusing compared to the guide (but left the name - would've changed it but thought I should have confirmation of which is correct first). Also changed "low start" to "sit start" in the Full Power description after Andy's comments on my beta thread. Finally The Celtic Cross (guide name) is on as Tricky Arete - again didn't want to change it without more knowledge (Andy Popp?)

[Andy B]

Been logging some of the stuff I did in the last week and had some comments:

1] The 8 billion different "attributes" for each problem really need to be further down the page, certainly below the grade vote breakdown. They're handy if you're searching for types of problem, building a ticklist etc, but of secondary importance once you're on the page - hopefully there'll generally be pics or video by then for most stuff.

There are lots of little things like this on there that could do with changing/ improving, but Gareth, who does all of the hard stuff on PB.info is a busy man in his job and a very keen climber, which doesn't leave him masses of time to change and develop things on there.

2] The big issue as i see it is that the site relies on folk registering their ascents to improve as a resource, but it's not really happening at the moment - for example the nose and breakfast have got 5 ascents each, seems unlikely that more of the sites users have not done these - so why aren't the ascents on there? I think it's that people aren't 'rewarded' as such for registering their ascents - the obvious way would be to allow users to see what they've done via their profile something like on bleau.info (HALAM, or HALA JB), sounds petty, but I like looking at what I've done, and I guess others may too?

I agree that the grade votes dont mean much until a significant number of people have registered ascents. I suggested a way round this would be to use the current guidebook grade as problems' default grade (especially as the most recent guide has used a fairly wide consensus for most problems). At least until the number of registered ascents reaches a reasonable threshold, but I was outvoted. I guess lots of people have no wish, or at least some reticence, to putting everything they do on a public site. My personal reason for not logging problems on there, despite being involved in its initial development, is that I think, having been a fairly vocal critic of people publicising what they do on 8a.nu, it may be hypocritical for me to then stick everything on PB.info.

3] I changed the description for Neil's/Nigel's Roof as what was there seemed very confusing compared to the guide (but left the name - would've changed it but thought I should have confirmation of which is correct first). Also changed "low start" to "sit start" in the Full Power description after Andy's comments on my beta thread. Finally The Celtic Cross (guide name) is on as Tricky Arete - again didn't want to change it without more knowledge (Andy Popp?)

Some things don't necessarily have definitive answers, for instance Neil's/Nigel's Roof are both correct as I don't think he named it himself, cos he did it when we were just fucking around there. With regard to making changes on the site, I wanted changes to go through a veto process, in case there ended up being loads of bollocks on there, but Gareth wanted it totally open, and he seems to have largely been proven right (and myself wrong) as I haven't seen a deluge of mis-information appear on there.

[andy popp]

Finally The Celtic Cross (guide name) is on as Tricky Arete - again didn't want to change it without more knowledge (Andy Popp?)

I've no idea about Celtic Cross/Tricky Arete (would guess CC is an invention of Grimer's) but I originally named 'Little Gem' as 'Middle England'. I didn't jump start on the (presumed) FA.

[r-man]

The number of people actively contributing isn't massive, but there are more than a handful, and those who do are doing a great job. Since last year there have been over 300 new problems and 250 new videos. In total there have been nearly 2000 ascents registered, with the best covered problems being the old classics.

I've noticed recently that more videos of less established problems have been popping up, which is a nice development, due largely I'm sure to inspiration from the new guidebook. (But the winner is still Brad Pit, with 11 videos! Downgrade to 7B+ immediately).

Big thanks to everyone who has added, tweaked or registered anything. The site isn't perfect, but the growing amount of content is making it more and more useful. There are various niggles, but as Andy says, the programmer is a busy man. Commenting on this thread is a good idea if you want to see changes, as I email him the link occasionally so he can see people are keen (he doesn't check ukb himself). At the moment, he is just too busy, but has still been paying the bill for hosting the site every year. Good man.

I just saw this:

do pics that are uploaded need to be a certain size???

No - there's no size limit. Obviously big files will take ages to upload. The website stores the high res version and displays a compressed version. The plan here is that when computers/the internet get faster the high res version will be used instead of the compressed version.

[lagerstarfish]

My personal reason for not logging problems on there, despite being involved in its initial development, is that I think, having been a fairly vocal critic of people publicising what they do on 8a.nu, it may be hypocritical for me to then stick everything on PB.info.

could it be possible to have ones contributions/ticks hidden, or anonymised - but still use the details (grade, type of problem, num of pads etc) to help other users?

[Johnny Brown]

I think there's a big difference between 8a.nu and a pb, bleau or even UKC logbook - a) the points system, and b) the fact you're not contributing to as useful a database. I started logbooks on bleau and UKC purely because I didn't have the relevant guidebooks at the time and wanted to keep a record that wasn't a scrap of paper I would lose. Having used them for a while, a think they're great - especially now nearly all the guides I've got ticks in have been superseded. You can have a private log on bleau and ukc, though grades votes and ticks still count.