[Bonjoy]

Wrote this before reading your reply Andy:

Right here’s the puzzle. If the easiest way to get from J to D is via James’ sequence then Westwood and the Pessimist are two distinct problems. If though it is easier to traverse from J rightwards into a position on the Pessimist and then finish as for that then the Pessimist isn’t a problem worthy of a name, it’s just the logical sit start position of Westwood which was missed by the FA (or has become such since J broke).
If the former then the two should just get called by their names and all is right in the world. If the latter then you either take the line that you guys seem to, which is that retro-eliminates are verboten, in which case surely the Pessimist should get abolished and renamed Westwood? Or you could just accept that people do refer to ‘the original way on Westwood’ and define an eliminate based on that….



So to reply to your last post Andy, to record Westwood and Pessimist as two none eliminates doesn't make much sense. I hate hidden rules and short of those it sounds from what you're saying that Westwood is now just a crap way to start the Pessimist. Surely seeing as James climbed the line first the two should jest get bundled under his original name?
PS. I defer to your better memory of hold K as you no doubt tried the prob properly, whereas I mostly just watched.

[Andy B]

I don't see any hidden rules.

I see Westwood and the pessimist as two different problems as they have different starts but happen to share the same hard bit. Whether you find Westwood easier by a big throw between jugs or boning filth will depend on the climber, and if like Dave says they are the same grade, then we don't need any rules or eliminates, it's just horses for courses.

I still can't believe you really thought I love pinches wall that much!

[Andy B]

Re. The guide book writers seeing sense etc. I think a significant, and growing number of boulderers are turning straight to the tinterweb and often bypassing guides altogether for their crag/ problem info.

As an (unrelated) example of the sorts of leaps of logic people can make from inter web information: following the tor eliminate stuff on here recently, I heard a guy (I won't embarrass him cos he comes on here) telling some friends how he'd done Bens roof "properly" without the knee bar. When asked about his sequence he explained that he used the knee bar for one or two of the moves but didn't rest on it, so that was OK.

[Bonjoy]

I don't see any hidden rules.

I see Westwood and the pessimist as two different problems as they have different starts but happen to share the same hard bit. Whether you find Westwood easier by a big throw between jugs or boning filth will depend on the climber, and if like Dave says they are the same grade, then we don't need any rules or eliminates, it's just horses for courses.

I still can't believe you really thought I love pinches wall that much!

Fair point, it being fortunate if both are 8a, though it seems sad that described thus Westwood becomes a bit of a none entity, a historical curio, for all but a rare bread of power mutant with relatively weak fingers. What we need is someone to link in eatswood roof and that line of climbing will make sense again.

Good to hear I've climbed Ben's Roof properly.




On the general point of eliminates being only a bit of fun. If only everything fitted neatly into that view. There are plenty of examples of problems where an obvious rule is essential to vastly improve a problem, in such cases the eliminate to all intents and purposes IS the true line. What would Big Boss or T-Crack be if you used everything in reach? Many effective eliminates hide behind vague descriptions like ‘climb direct’, ‘bear left’, which can just be a description of the direction of travel but often really means ‘climb direct as holds either side are out of bounds’. Personally I’d rather things where well defined even if that means admitting that a lot of supposedly pure things are actually a bit eliminate.

[abarro81]

I heard a guy (I won't embarrass him cos he comes on here) telling some friends how he'd done Bens roof "properly" without the knee bar. When asked about his sequence he explained that he used the knee bar for one or two of the moves but didn't rest on it, so that was OK.

  I like that

[Andy B]

It’s a fair argument that treating places in this way might encourage proliferation into inappropriate areas but I don’t think this is reason enough not to do it for places that really fit the bill. The existence of sub-problem entities, which eliminates are in most cases, in the right context only detract from the lines they bastardise if people are daft enough to let them, as is the case at Crag X where most of the none eliminate versions of things aren’t recognised problems.

Crag X is a good example of where eliminates detract from the quality of the true line. So much so in this case that people have much less knowledge of and interest in the true lines than the eliminates, even though the true lines are quality, and the problems are regularly under debate which, again detracts from the quality of the venue as a whole.

I agree about T Crack and Big Boss. That's what makes them crap problems.

I don't think what I've said makes Westwood into an historical curio. They are just two different and equally valid starts.

[Ru]

Doesn't the Pessimist start at the same point as Bonners has put the eatswood Traverse starting - i.e. on the juggy shelf?

[Bonjoy]

It starts on a the big flatty/jug, the traverse starts a few moves right with one hand in crack

[Ru]

Ok, funny perspective on the topo photo.

[monkey boy]

I don't think original Westwood will become a none entity, like Andy says horses for courses. For one I will never have good enough skin to bone that horrid crimp! Power move all the way for me. I think it's a really hard problem whichever way you choose to do it.

[Bonjoy]

Ok good, I'll give it another makeover on Monday

[Bonjoy]

[Bonjoy]

Here's a vid of Rubble Rouser, now with extra few moves at the start. I'm going to stick my neck out and suggest 7c+ for this, but might well be only 7c, needs a repeat. Warning - this vid has a a minute and a half of kneebar resting, consider yourself warned.




There's a few other new things I'll get round to writing up in a day or so when I can update the topo (again), including a good 8a from Ned.

[dave]

 Good resting skills.

[Yoof]

Amazing effort with all of these, and the topo! Have a wad point (think it's the first one I've given)!

It seems I'll have many new link ups to try when everywhere else is wet

[Bonjoy]

Cheers Yoof.

Those new things and another topo revision:

Underwood 7b + - From a low sit start (undercut and sidepull) left of the midway jug on the traverse gain the lip direct (i.e. eliminating midway jug) and finish along the traverse.

Lip Up Fatty 7b – Sit start Kristian’s Problem from the midway jug. Though this is a bit of a link-up it is a good logical none elimate. Quite probably done by other before.

Bone Machine 8a – The obvious high start to the R-L traverse. Start on the ledge at the base of the crack and burl along undercuts and small lip holds to a hard drop down into the midway jug, then finish as per the eatswood Traverse. Bring kneepads. FA Ned Feehally. Ned also did a reverse of the hard section, low jug to crack/ledge at 7c+.

I’ve climbed Rubble Rouser and the eatswood Trav from the new logical start, which makes sense as the default for both now I think. I’d say it pushes up the notional sport grade a notch on ET but not the bouldering grade and I think it nudges RR to 7c+. Talking of notional sport grades I’ve added them to the traverses on the topo, take them with a pinch of salt especially my total guess for Bone Machine.
The new topo also includes things on the slab side of the arete. Cave Arete and the rockover finish to any of the steep arete problems are excellent and well worth doing if you’re then in dry conditions.
It’s worth a mention that this place has been bone dry every day (except the mega drizzle day maybe) through all the recent crappy weather, it doesn’t suffer seepage, it’s semi-shaded most of the time and is very conditions independent for grit.

[Paul B]

Bone Machine 8a – The obvious high start to the R-L traverse. Start on the ledge at the base of the crack and burl along undercuts and small lip holds to a hard drop down into the midway jug, then finish as per the eatswood Traverse. Bring kneepads. FA Ned Feehally. Ned also did a reverse of the hard section, low jug to crack/ledge at 7c+.

Awesome. Tried this a bit with Nacho (F to N direction), is there a video?

[Bonjoy]

Have only got footage of it in sections unfortunately. Forgot camera on second visit. The moves a fairly different depending on if you go L-R or R-L, either way they look great. L-R is a touch easier move for move and you don't need two kneepads on but overall would probably be a harder grade if the start of eatswood Reverse was added.

[shark]

I sense a bit of social engineering to encourage people to do the new start to eatswood Traverse by giving it a harder French grade.

The original was still 8a IMOFWIW

[Yoof]

I sense a bit of social engineering to encourage people to do the new start to eatswood Traverse by giving it a harder French grade.

I always thought the "start with one hand in the crack" rule was a bit arbitrary, and I think "start at the beginning of the cave" makes a bit more sense and will improve the problem.

I have no idea about route grades >7a

[Bonjoy]

I sense a bit of social engineering to encourage people to do the new start to eatswood Traverse by giving it a harder French grade.

The original was still 8a IMOFWIW

Yeah maybe. Adding six moves does make it feel significantly harder by the time you get to the crux, but given that I think TET is lowish 7B+ I personally didn’t think it pushed up the bouldering grade, but others might disagree. A couple of the new 7Bs are perhaps harder than TET but it’s hard for me to factor how much of that is over familiarity. If I’d given TET 7C it would seem well out of kilter with the rest of the cave. Maybe the new version is f8a+. Any way round it is a bit of an ill fit tbh.
Generally the grades on the new ones are rough at the moment as I haven’t been bouldering much elsewhere and my only recent frame of reference is other eatswood probs, which includes a 7A+ I can’t do and a 7B+ I can path  . Needs some repeats for second opinions really.

[El Mocho]

...Rubble Rouser, now with extra few moves at the start. I'm going to stick my neck out and suggest 7c+ for this, but might well be only 7c, needs a repeat.

but given that I think TET is lowish 7B+... ...If I’d given TET 7C it would seem well out of kilter with the rest of the cave.

Went and did Rubble Rouser, didn't use knee bar, would like to claim for ethical reasons but actually just don't own one and I didn't want to loose my lower leg (it is sharp). Was good and fairly pumpy/tired core by the end. Prob right for F8a+.

I failed (once again) to do TET which is MUCH harder than Rubble Rouser.

Did: Rouse A Rubble (pretty self explanatory) but reverses Rubble Rouser, slightly different sequence and again I didn't knee bar. Harder move in reverse but it comes at the start so felt slightly easier.

It was hot.

[Bonjoy]

Good work. Pleased to see you sorted the grades out then 

[Johnny Brown]

didn't use knee bar, would like to claim for ethical reasons but actually just don't own one

lol.