[petejh]

Like Arnaud Petit didn't at Ceuse. We need an equivalent.

[Offwidth]

I think documenting the Woolpacks is plain daft - the rock just isn't good enough and I doubt very much if traffic will improve things.

There are many types of daft. There is daft because it could cause tensions with walkers photographers etc if the rock appearance gets messed up (a real concern), that associates closely with being daft that the rock isnt suitable for bouldering as there isnt a resiliant outer skin, then there is the journalistic exclusivity daft that despite the fact nobody wants it  (for good reasons) its somehow a moth to a flame for Rockfax as the BMC didnt include it.... all as if its a secret star venue.

[Clart]

Although I don't buy the idea that Grinah will get trashed by being documented, as it's remote and has very good rock quality, I do on balance agree with the other arguments to keep it uncharted.

Never heard of an area being kept deliberately off the radar but what a lovely thought.

On a separate note, just been on UKC and noticed Shark's tireless beta policing of Green Traverse, quality effort and too right:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/item.html?crag=101&route=The+Green+Traverse

[SEDur]

Never heard of an area being kept deliberately off the radar but what a lovely thought.

God forbid anyone is stupid enough to put CragX in a guide for 'historical significance'.
Thankfully climbing is so banned there, Wrongfax have not included it.

That place would get ruined by every London plastic jockey going.

In relation to Grinah, I have to agree that it should be kept off the books for pretty much all the reasons above.

Not only because we don't want another set of hypocritical walkers shout about damage to the hill, and some nutter with a vendetta taking a hammer to the crag a la RHS/Cratcliffe.

[shark]

That place would get ruined by every London plastic jockey going.

No need for that

[GCW]

Just take a look at the Kebs to see what the potential is.

[tomtom]

Its all in the 'distance from car' factor... once you get past a 15 min walk in I think popularity decreases exponentially with distance...

Kebs is a shame

[Stubbs]

God forbid anyone is stupid enough to put CragX in a guide for 'historical significance'.
Thankfully climbing is so banned there, Wrongfax have not included it.

That place would get ruined by every London plastic jockey going.

Strangely enough people from London can use the internet too, and quite a few of them are actually strong enough to get up problems at Cr*******ok too, imagine that!

Venues where there is no climbing below 7A seem a lot less susceptible to getting trashed.

[tomtom]

Venues where there is no climbing below 7A seem a lot less susceptible to getting trashed.

Yup. Word.

[scottygillery]

Venues where there is no climbing below 7A seem a lot less susceptible to getting trashed.

Yup. Word.

Basically punters trash places. Takes a certain reverence for nature to climb 7A.

[Durbs]

I take mild offence at being called a plastic jockey, and a sub-7a climber too.

Surely the 7a upwards crags are just less trashed as fewer people climb 7a than 5+.

(Apologies if I've missed obvious sarcasm)

[mrjonathanr]

 Takes a certain reverence for nature to climb 7A.

(Apologies if I've missed obvious sarcasm)

[Fiend]

On a separate note, just been on UKC and noticed Shark's tireless beta policing of Green Traverse, quality effort and too right:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/photos/item.html?crag=101&route=The+Green+Traverse

LOL, FFS Shark, it's called The Green Traverse not The Shit Historical Eliminate Missing Out The Natural Line Of Weakness Traverse

If the FA did it with a duff sequence then pity for them. It's a LINE and it should be climbed however that line is climbed. At best the duff eliminate could be mentioned as a historical footnote.





N.B. I did it via dropping down and lunging up because that's what worked for me. Too short to span left and too inflexible to get a heel to work with the crimp rail.

[dave]

Fiend, there's a path round the back for anyone needing an easier sequence.

[galpinos]

LOL, FFS Shark, it's called The Green Traverse not The Shit Historical Eliminate Missing Out The Natural Line Of Weakness Traverse

If the FA did it with a duff sequence then pity for them. It's a LINE and it should be climbed however that line is climbed. At best the duff eliminate could be mentioned as a historical footnote.

It's not a line, the problem is an eliminate (and local testpiece), always has been, hence Ron's Reach etc. Every so often a problem is eliminate and has rules. This is one of them. If it's a good enough problem, it'll warrant doing it, if not, it'll get ignored. Turns out, this one is good enough despite the "rules".

[Fiend]

Choads 

[tomtom]

I do Green traverse in a quasi rons reach method - whereby I (at all times keeping feet low) drop LH onto the rail, then go again with the left for the next hold a-la rons reach... the crux then is holding the swing when you let go with the right hand (same as crux for rons reach)

Probably highly illegal I've been told (repeatedly by Lagers) that the only true way is to drop down and campus from the rail...

For the record, I once chatted to Ron about it - under Green traverse where he was doing laps of Rons Reach and asked what he considered what was in or out etc.. and he gave me a smile and said it doesnt really matter...

[Bonjoy]

Just take a look at the Kebs to see what the potential is.

Hmmm. Like the Woolpacks they have soft rock, but there the similarity ends. Until the day someone invents a cheap oneman helicopter I think the place is pretty safe regardless of what Rockfax do or don't write.

[GCW]

I wasn't comparing specifically with Woolpacks, just an observation of the impact of popularity.  The Kebs have (had?) plenty of lower grade problems and easy access.  I've been going for over 15 years and the change more recently is incredibly depressing.

[shark]

I do the Green traverse in a quasi rons reach method - whereby I (at all times keeping feet low) drop LH onto the rail, then go again with the left for the next hold a-la rons reach... the crux then is holding the swing when you let go with the right hand (same as crux for rons reach)

 

[Boredboy]

Doesn't the green traverse go with heel hooks, the new approved font 6b sequence?

[shark]

Doesn't the green traverse go with heel hooks, the new approved font 6b sequence?

The old ways must be preserved

[Offwidth]

Isn't the 6b way with heel hooks called The Green Travesty?

[nai]

If it isn't, it should be. Nice Work.

[SEDur]

God forbid anyone is stupid enough to put CragX in a guide for 'historical significance'.
Thankfully climbing is so banned there, Wrongfax have not included it.

That place would get ruined by every London plastic jockey going.

Strangely enough people from London can use the internet too, and quite a few of them are actually strong enough to get up problems at Cr*******ok too, imagine that!

Venues where there is no climbing below 7A seem a lot less susceptible to getting trashed.

Yeah, maybe I did run my mouth off slightly.
I apolagise.

That said, I read the Natural England report of Cr******ok the other day;
The report seem quite concerning about the whole habitat, not just whats at the bottom by the river.
The recent short hand report on NE website said that the area is getting a little damaged.