[Kingy]

This E grader 'progress' with E grades is all well and good and it seems like the humble UK tech grade will be gently ushered the door in digital databases in the future if I foresee it correctly.

Once paper guidebooks have made their way to landfill in the next 10 - 20 years, how are people to know the history of our E graded climbs if they are not recorded online? I think the full E grade plus tech grade is an integral part of UK climbing history and as such worth preserving. Knowing that Indian Face was graded E9 6c in 1986 by Johnny or that Calvary was E4 6a is part of what gives UK climbing character. If this is quietly binned then we all lose out and part of the richness is lost. 

I accept all technical/ convenience arguments regarding UK grades but don't think they can ever justify erasing part of climbing history.

[northern yob]

Agreed sad times indeed….. climbing continues to become at least in the mainstream more soulless! There’s plenty of soul out there it’s just being pushed into the margins, which given it used to have more soul but was a marginal sport maybe balances it all out. It pisses me off that the likes of lattice/wideboyz and Ukc seem to give it traction just for clicks but that’s the world we live in!

[shark]

There will always be an enthusiastic segment of the climbing community that love and will preserve its history

[Paul B]

There will always be an enthusiastic segment of the climbing community that love and will preserve its history

Exactly. I bet more than one of us can name a B9 graded problem for instance?

[andy_e]

Trackside?

Oh no, that was B8 apparently

[lukeyboy]

I have to say, I disagree.

I share your view that it's important our climbing history and culture is recorded and preserved, but for me the tech grade is not an interesting or important part of that. It's the route names, the characters, the lines and the stories that make up the history, not an alphanumeric reference number which will likely be meaningless to most climbers in a few decades time.

Whether you call Indian Face E9 6c or E9 Fr7b or whatever, all the interesting and important stuff still remains - tales of the first ascent, the boldness of the line, epics had on it, the bolt saga etc.

Just my two pence.

[spidermonkey09]

 I also think the phrase "erasure of climbing history" is absolutely not what is happening. It's an overly emotive term. It's the development of climbing history and the incorporation of new perspectives.

As I said in the other thread I consider the tech grade all but obsolete and won't mourn its phasing out. I agree with lukeyboy, it's not a meaningful thing for me personally in a historical sense.

[Kingy]

I understand the UK tech grade is not going anywhere on UKC so no phasing out/ erasing (or whatever we choose to call it.)

As an aside, seems like a good opportunity to share this nugget of climbing history on the Indian Face. E9 6c is in the streets every night!

https://www.planetmountain.com/en/news/climbing/e9-6c-the-video-of-john-redhead-and-johnny-dawes.html

[Fiend]

"E9 6c speaks of collecting, speaks of commodities, speaks of CVs, and business, it speaks of climbers being paid to do a job"

That first part, along with "speaks of ego, speaks of attention-seeking", should be on the preface of every grade section of every guidebook.

[duncan]

I love climbing history but, generally speaking, I don't see numbers per se as hugely historically important except perhaps in first-of-the-grade discussions. Ironically, these are invariably framed in contemporary grades rather than the ones given at the time of their first ascent.

The history of Cenotaph Corner is it's status as a 'last great problem', how it was named long before being climbed, Menlove Edwards top-roping it in the 1930s, Peter Harding's attempt after the war, Joe Brown's getting to the niche on his first try but dropping his peg hammer on his belayer's head and all that. That it used to be XS (no tech. grade) and is now E1 5b does not detract from that history. Grading it E1 6a+ in the future won't detract from its history either!

[Offwidth]

 It might affect it's future though if it encourages poor style top-roping, pre redpoint attempt

[mrjonathanr]

Calvary was E4 6a is part of what gives UK climbing character. If this is quietly binned then we all lose out and part of the richness is lost. 

I think a knowledge of how a grade has evolved can illuminate how people viewed a route. Whether that is significant enough to retain,  don’t know. Calvary was previously E4 5c, Maybe even XS in ‘76?

[Kingy]

Calvary was E4 6a is part of what gives UK climbing character. If this is quietly binned then we all lose out and part of the richness is lost. 

I think a knowledge of how a grade has evolved can illuminate how people viewed a route. Whether that is significant enough to retain,  don’t know. Calvary was previously E4 5c, Maybe even XS in ‘76?

I bow to your superior knowledge. I first started climbing at Stanage in 1993 so anything before that is an unknown quantity. Fascinating to see how the grades have come on over the years.

[webbo]

Calvary was E4 6a is part of what gives UK climbing character. If this is quietly binned then we all lose out and part of the richness is lost. 

I think a knowledge of how a grade has evolved can illuminate how people viewed a route. Whether that is significant enough to retain,  don’t know. Calvary was previously E4 5c, Maybe even XS in ‘76?

It was XS 5c in the Bancroft guide which stated it was now free.