Yeah, the more I think about it the more I think he'd have to relead it. Otherwise, who knows where the clips were? Slate has a long history of bolts where the clips were the crux, and while this may not be the case here it doesn't mean they aren't an integral part of a sport lead.
Quote from: Johnny Brown on November 07, 2023, 12:31:15 pmYeah, the more I think about it the more I think he'd have to relead it. Otherwise, who knows where the clips were? Slate has a long history of bolts where the clips were the crux, and while this may not be the case here it doesn't mean they aren't an integral part of a sport lead.I can't see how that would make a difference? If the bolts haven't been placed where the knots were then you'd just extend them until they were?(I'm not trying to persuade you otherwise, just exploring the thinking behind your view)
That would depend on whether Caff gets there 'first'? I don't think the comparisons to extending draws elsewhere are great. There are plenty of challenges on slate where doing so would be a retrograde step.
Also, did the write up not say the start was actually easier than the meltdown original? (and the crux is later)
Effectively climbs the straight up line of the buttress, missing out the first hard move of the Meltdown, but with harder moves to join the same point from below and a harder finish.
Well, if the bolt is now 30cm left or right it could be a ballache to clip?...with the wrong length QD on it the rope can get in the road of the crux foot sequence.
It would be interesting to see a photo of what went on. This comment on UKC 'ask him if he's plan on leaving his spiders web art installation of fixed ropes up permanently?' suggests it's a lot more than just a single rope with some knots in it akin to a bolt extension. My view is it isn't a route yet. Unless he places or arranges bolts to be placed asap in the positions he used, he's done a decent ascent equivalent to a clean top-rope. It would be very easy for him to now drill them in more awkward positions, whether intentionally or not. As it stands it lacks the permanence to be repeatable, it will be noted in the line's history, but not the FA.There may some precedents around the world but they're all notably isolated incidents where the general consensus has been, as Pete put it, that it would soon be a shitshow if we carried on similarly. Taking a step back, I do think that to claim a sport route, it has to exist as such. Sport climbing is defined by the presence of bolts. If you want to establish sport climbs then you have to grapple with the ethical issues of drilling.
a sociopathic obsession with controversy.
Quote from: spidermonkey09 on November 07, 2023, 01:19:12 pma sociopathic obsession with controversy.Is it this, or is it desperation for recognition which then leads to exaggerated/misleading claims? (which ultimately results in the controversy)
OMG I’ve just realised all these routes and proposed routes with names and sport grades and proposed trad grades are listed on UKC, as Franco is the crag moderator for Twll Mawr. No asterisks to indicate ‘a newly updated climb waiting to be checked by the crag moderator’. It’s all getting a bit Si O’Connor.
Maybe it's changed recently, but anything unclimbed has a grade of 'project' and 'unclimbed' in the FA details. To me that seems pretty clear and not like anything is being claimed. I kind of like it, seems like the modern equivalent of having projects mentioned in the guide.
I don’t mind a ‘project’ being listed. But naming and grading trad routes that haven’t been climbed is completely ridiculous ego-driven bolloxs in my view. Can I add ‘Tom’s arête’ E8 7b 3 stars “climb the arête right of Smiling Buttress”? I’ve been on it a couple of times and have some idea of the difficulty. No, of course I can’t!
Maybe it's just me but it doesn't seem that crazy. Smiling Buttress, Wizard Ridge, Launch Pad Project etc. were all named before they were climbed and of course the FA is free to suggest whatever name and grade they want (e.g. Launch Pad Project became Floatin').