[Bonjoy]

This seems excessively militant to me and pretty shit if you're very small e.g. you're a kid. The fact is that it's a better solution (and retains more difficulty) than the alternative, I.e. starting on the sit handholds without sitting. The truth is that the super short are usually highly disadvantaged on a large proportion of the rest of moves, so crying 'unfair' on a second pad to reach the start holds is unnecessary and borderline vindictive.

[Fiend]

Any problem where the crux is pulling your arse off the ground is invariably shit. Any problem where that's the crux for tall people and the crux for shorter people is actually reaching the starting holds should never even be claimed nor recorded.

[edshakey]

I'm sure it all evens out in the end.

Not sure about that. There are sit starts where short people maybe be completely unable to pull on with a single normal pad, just impossible. But for tall people, there are hardly any problems you'd say are impossible for the height, just maybe harder at times.

Short people have it hard enough without telling them to move on from a problem just cos a 6'2 bloke did the FA from the only possible holds and doesn't want anyone using more pads than they did.

[Anti]

If a normal person can't reach the start holds sat on one pad I'm generally inclined to think it's a shit problem. Or a crouch start.

If you're stacking pads because you literally can't reach the holds, I think that's fine, but stop when you can. If you're stacking them to make a hard move easy, move on.

[Andy W]

Any problem where the crux is pulling your arse off the ground is invariably shit. Any problem where that's the crux for tall people and the crux for shorter people is actually reaching the starting holds should never even be claimed nor recorded.

Gallt yr Ogof another one, 'sway on' it might be shit, but seems popular and the crux is certainly pulling your arse of the ground. le barre fixe assis, Elephant, popular, Verdict, Cuvier Rampart, but I quite like sit starts because my knees are dodgy and I don't like highballs.

[Andy W]

If a normal person can't reach the start holds sat on one pad I'm generally inclined to think it's a shit problem. Or a crouch start.

If you're stacking pads because you literally can't reach the holds, I think that's fine, but stop when you can. If you're stacking them to make a hard move easy, move on.

Exactly its not a sit start and as you say probably a crouch start, which are probably open to more interpretative abuse than sit starts.

[Bonjoy]

I think people's opinions about this or that type of problem being shit is irrelevant to the question of what is and isn't legitimate.

[scragrock]

Here's a possible example:

No idea how the FA did it. Cool looking problems.

Here is Dave putting up the F.A sit to my stand (starts at 7:25)


Yeah its a cool bloc but another one that has sharp explosive holds unfortunately.

[Bonjoy]

Any problem where the crux is pulling your arse off the ground is invariably shit. Any problem where that's the crux for tall people and the crux for shorter people is actually reaching the starting holds should never even be claimed nor recorded.

Having said I think this sort of observation is irrelevant and beside the point, I also disagree with its substance. Yrs, this sort of problem often is pretty poor, but it isn't invariably so, or always umworthy of being recorded. For instance Little Rascal SS at Burbage South is not amazing but is definitely non-shit and worth a name and a grade.

[Andy W]

This seems excessively militant to me and pretty shit if you're very small e.g. you're a kid. The fact is that it's a better solution (and retains more difficulty) than the alternative, I.e. starting on the sit handholds without sitting. The truth is that the super short are usually highly disadvantaged on a large proportion of the rest of moves, so crying 'unfair' on a second pad to reach the start holds is unnecessary and borderline vindictive.

Militant, hows that? I think as a base measure a sit start from the ground is entirely quantifiable, any variation with extra pads becomes somewhat subjective.

[teestub]

There is certainly a creeping upwards trend. In Font the rule certainly used to be a sit start started on the ground, sans pad.

Would it be ok to use pads in Bleau to make the ground level similar to when the first ascent was done, prior to all the subsequent erosion?!

[SA Chris]

Short people have it hard enough without telling them to move on from a problem just cos a 6'2 bloke did the FA from the only possible holds and doesn't want anyone using more pads than they did.

Climbing equivalent of nursery school sports day where everyone who runs the race gets a medal

[scragrock]

Here's a possible example:

No idea how the FA did it. Cool looking problems.

Oh wow, so many issues! The arse thrusting cheaty start off a folded (and propped up?) pad, the dab. Incredible. How does he sleep at night?

Agreed 
This man is a Lanky C*nt faced streak of piss{i should know, he is and has been a great friend for over 10 years}.
In answer to the issues-
The thrusting{which is involuntary} is caused by a horrible welding accident where a molten shard seared its way deep into his gooch, it cannot be removed without permanent and irreversible damage to the workings of his tiny manhood{a bit like a genital version of Ironman}.
The pad IS folded and propped just like his Ego{eh?}
It is because of the "Dab" that Mr Goodwin no longer sleeps at night...
I partially buried him in my garden and for several months have been keeping him alive via an industrial snorkel, through this device he receives air, gruel and contaminated fluids. Sporadically i pump in the putrid sounds of Celine Dion as even sleep deprivation is too good for him.
The only part of this disgusting excuse for a human left above the surface is his scrawny pimpled arse, Cause i need somewhere to park me bike.

Another sinful Dabee quite literally bites the dust

The quest continues

[Danny]

For a subtle but similar issue see the sit start to Eat It at Fair Head. Stand is 7A. Sit is 2 moves into it, of which the first is the crux. Hardest 7B+ I've ever tried, with a pull on then go approach. I think generating momentum from a bum rocket isn't cricket. However, pulling on and going cleanly, in one motion, is deffo easier than pausing. Is this cricket? Not clear to me.

For reference. Duffy making something that is not a piece of piss look like a piece of piss. Before the inevitable - the arrow was tape, not chalk!

Thread split time?

I've seen Duffy casually do that many times. Clearly a cricket ascent IMO, as he pulls on then goes. As for it being a height thing—maybe, but I'm lanky AF, so maybe strength has something to do with it. Michael is 8C strong and Eddie B is not weak.

[steveri]

Not keen on double mat sit starts but also climb a fair bit on my own and get unusually frightened when head height above the ground. Which is kind of funny revisiting old stuff done in the 90s pre-pads. Oh the knots we tie ourselves in. Or don’t actually.

[edshakey]

Short people have it hard enough without telling them to move on from a problem just cos a 6'2 bloke did the FA from the only possible holds and doesn't want anyone using more pads than they did.

Climbing equivalent of nursery school sports day where everyone who runs the race gets a medal

If it's easy to implement, doesn't affect anyone else, and means different sized people climbing at similar grades have a much greater chance to enjoy working the same stuff together, then I say dish them out

If Mr Tickle isn't allowed to miss out all the start holds and pull on really high, then define the start holds and let everyone use the minimum number of pads (>= 1) to access these holds. It has its own merits and flaws but it keeps things like grades much better in check.

[Kingy]

Interesting topic. Some initial thoughts, 'one pad' could mean anything as a Moon Saturn is very thick compared to other single pads.

I think its often easier to pull on from sitting with a thinner pad or no pad as you are less bunched up. This is counterintuitive as you might think the higher up you are the easier the pull on would be. However, its perhaps a bit like starting a pull up from locked off, which is harder than starting from hanging with straight arms.

For standing starts, starting higher usually makes things easier. Try starting Trigger Cut in the Cave with 2 pads then with 5 pads. Way easier to pull on from higher up which has a knock on effect for the rest of the problem.

[moose]

I think its often easier to pull on from sitting with a thinner pad or no pad as you are less bunched up. This is counterintuitive as you might think the higher up you are the easier the pull on would be. However, its perhaps a bit like starting a pull up from locked off, which is harder than starting from hanging with straight arms.

I often have a similar problem with sit-starts - high up and also so far away from the rock to accommodate my legs that I am pulling outwards on the holds rather than downward.  There's a 6c at Caley that I will never do precisely for this reason (despite having climbed a lot of much harder stuff there).

[SA Chris]

copycat cheating off video beta

This seems to be the rot. Just because you saw a video on YouTube of someone doing it like that, doesn't mean its right.

[jwi]

Nothing beats the ill informed keyboard warriors who tricked Koyamada to travel back to Switzerland to start Story of two worlds from below the original starting holds. A start that is so daft that it has to this day never been repeated

[Wellsy]

I kind of feel like if you're reasonable and don't take the piss then you can do whatever, you just should be able to look yourself in the eye in a mirror and honestly say you did it without underhand tricks. There aren't really hard rules cos rocks and people are hugely varied.

So if you can't reach the starting holds and you put another pad down that's fine but if you double stacked when you could already reach and made the move way easier. And ultimately 99.999% of the time the only person who this matters to is you and your own sense of "honour" for want of a better word.

I do like specified start holds and clear marking of blocks as in or out and so on. I think that they make problems better, despite the oft-heard assertion that they're eliminate and therefore worse.

[User deactivated.]

Agree with Wellsy that defined start holds can be good and there should be no hard rules on things like the number of pads. We should just do what is reasonable. What is reasonable for one person on one boulder may not be reasonable for another. And if someone wants to stack 3 pads to get a good position on the undercut then they will be deservedly mocked because that is not reasonable.

This works in UK Building Regulations, which are functional rather than prescriptive. E.g. "The building shall be designed and constructed so that, in the event of fire, its stability will be maintained for a reasonable period". Bring out your dabs thread is an example of a code of practice demonstrating one way how not to comply with the regulation 

[andy moles]

I climbed a new problem in Strathspey a couple of months ago which might get repeated one day (probably not), which had a disproportionately hard start.

One of those where there's a slab beneath a steep overhang, and bunching yourself into a sit position it becomes awkward and desperate to pull on without feet on the slab, which would make the move trivial.

Solution?

Move a rock under it to sit off 

I'd been moving rocks around anyway to sort the landing, and it made for a much better start and more balanced problem.

Alternatively, I just wasn't good enough to take on the natural challenge laid down by the rock, etc, so I cheated   

[shark]

What if the sit start is to an arête which you are laying off (this isn’t a rhetorical question BTW)

[sxrxg]

The older i get the more i realise that unless the problem is cutting edge and someone is earning a living from claiming to have climbed something then does it really matter if we sit start something correctly? Everyone’s experience of a problem will be different any way with conditions on the day and other variables. I know that i have sacked off some sit starts as they have felt arbitrary to me even though that is the acknowledged line, in other cases i have been very strict with myself as i understand that the fun of the problem in question is the initial pull.

Usually if claiming a grade for something (not that anyone else generally cares with font 6's and 7's) we know in our heart if it feels the correct grade. If it feels too easy and your feet are using a plinth then stop using the plinth! At the end of the day we are climbing arbitrary bits of rock in the woods or out on the moors and mountains for fun, if it makes it more fun for you stacking pads then go for it (I have the same view of all other tactics as well provided that the rock is not damaged in any way and the next climber can chose their own path). At the end of the day the only person that you are cheating by claiming a higher grade is yourself as nobody else really cares.

As an anecdote some other people seem to get really wound up with this view of climbing, I have occasionally worked problems with others where the line is from a sit start and then whilst working the problem done all the moves from a couple of moves in (obvious starting hold in a roof) decided that i didn't want to do the full line (as the awkward start moves detracted from the rest of the problem for me) started packing up only to be lectured that i hadn't done the line and should just have a rest and get it done as 'you can easily do it next go from the start'. I think some people forget that a day out climbing is meant to be fun and challenging however the boundaries of this game are set between us and the rock alone. As an aside to this I still find it amusing when people ask me ‘what was that you just climbed’ and them being surprised when the response is I have no idea, it is like if the problem doesn’t exist in the pages of a guidebook then it isn’t a legitimate bit of rock to try and climb!