The Dewin Stone - New 9a+ Slab from Franco

[andy moles]

I don't think it's right to call it a weird top-rope. He was still leading between clippable points with all the normal scope for falling etc, it's just that some of those clippable points were temporary instead of fixed.

Why?

I've already said why... it's a succession of pre-set clippable points for protection, much like a line of bolts. So in that sense, how is it any less of a 'lead' than a self-equipped sport line?

I'm not saying it isn't bullshit for other reasons, just that to me it's a weird lead rather than a weird top rope.

And there's something odd about saying 'this was not a legitimate ascent because you didn't equip it properly for other people'.

 

[jwi]

The second hardest route at a local crag was done exactly in this fashion. Lead by clipping loops on a knotted static rope. (The FA was some thirty years ago.) The reason was that the two developers of the crag could not agree on where the line went, and as there was only really room for one route on that piece of the crag, one of them just threw down a static and went on to "lead" it.

The route did not get bolts until after the other developer died in a climbing accident.

 

[Paul B]

I've already said why... it's a succession of pre-set clippable points for protection, much like a line of bolts. So in that sense, how is it any less of a 'lead' than a self-equipped sport line?

Which is used by others as a TR way of soloing; it's not leading, even if it looks akin. I 'did' a Hard GritTM route before leaving Sheffield but tied the GriGri off at the gear; it's totally arbitary and a TR ascent. If that was in a knotted loop it'd still have been a TR even if looked closer to leading.

 

[Stahl]

Can't deny there's no precedent though, and

Todd Skinner also did a new route at Hueco like this in the early 90s - tensioned a knotted static line down the route with trad gear (I think some tube chocks/Big Bros in a couple of huecos) and clipped the draws tied to the static line - I think because there was a ban on bolting. Don't know if it was bolted/re-led later.

 

[Kingy]

I tend to agree that its not a valid sport ascent. As Stone said, Steve Roberts toproped Cry Freedom several times but was by his own admission scared to get on the lead. He still did the climb but by the ethical standards of the community, it was not a led ascent.

Slingshot, English 7b, at Froggatt was a toprope problem by Jerry Moffat in 1988 before bouldering mats were invented. I'm sure he could have contrived knotted protection if he wanted to for a 'lead' ascent. Now with several big pads, its a stout Font 7C+ to the ledge or E10 for the full route, Blind Vision.

 

[TdG]

If this is a legitimate lead/FA then (unless I'm missing something fundamental) the same tactic applied to any bit of rock would also be a legitimate lead.
That's quite a lot of trad FAs that suddenly got a whole lot more doable at a stroke!

The Southern Sandstone would be one of the least developed areas in the country. Dozens of unjustifiable solos finally made possible!

Regardless of if the ascent is legit: in general, climbing with a hanging rope makes for a poor quality experience.

 

[Will Hunt]

Why all the false equivalences talking about grit routes? We (generally, with some weird exceptions) don't allow bolting or sport climbing on grit, so of course a hanging rope clip up would not be legit.

On slate we allow sport climbs and we do insist on leading. This fits with those stylistic rules, but instead of clipping drilled metal he's clipped fixed loops. The Cry Freedom example isn't equivalent because we don't consider top roping to be legit style on limestone sport routes.

 

[petejh]

And there's something odd about saying 'this was not a legitimate ascent because you didn't equip it properly for other people'.

There is, but that's because climbing is plain odd when you start to analyse it.

It's obviously a legitimate climb of a piece of rock in the style that Franco climbed it. The problem is that it's a style virtually nobody who puts up new routes ever uses, almost without exception. And not because it hasn't been considered before.

Why I wonder do we not climb in this style and forget the part about putting bolts in new routes which aren't trad routes or top-rope routes? It would be all-round an easier, cheaper, quicker, less impactful way to do these routes.
I think probably because it comes with a very strong whiff of being a bit selfish, self-centred, and deliberately unhelpful or exclusive to other climbers now that we have easy access to good drills and bolts and using them has become common practice. The logic that anyone can drop a knotted rope to provide temporary protection points if they want to climb this route applies to any route at the Tor, Malham, LPT etc. Trying to rig ropes to climb on those crags because there weren't any bolts in place would make it a lot less enjoyable and inclusive an activity.

 

[abarro81]

I think in part it seems absurd because if you've got a hanging rope there why not just clip into it "properly" (with a shunt or whatever) and just TR the thing? Perhaps it just brings home the absurdity of climbing just a little too much to be comfortable.

 

[andy moles]

I've already said why... it's a succession of pre-set clippable points for protection, much like a line of bolts. So in that sense, how is it any less of a 'lead' than a self-equipped sport line?

Which is used by others as a TR way of soloing; it's not leading, even if it looks akin. I 'did' a Hard GritTM route before leaving Sheffield but tied the GriGri off at the gear; it's totally arbitary and a TR ascent. If that was in a knotted loop it'd still have been a TR even if looked closer to leading.

I think this is stretching the usefulness of the term 'top-rope' to include something more different to what is conventionally meant by 'top-roping' than it is from what is conventionally meant by leading.

Yes, it's arbitrary, you can put a knot anywhere you like. But if you're equipping a sport line, exactly the same is true of a bolt. A grit route is not a good comparison.

 

[andy moles]

I think in part it seems absurd because if you've got a hanging rope there why not just clip into it "properly" (with a shunt or whatever) and just TR the thing? Perhaps it just brings home the absurdity of climbing just a little too much to be comfortable.

I think there is some truth to this :lol:

 

[Bonjoy]

Why all the false equivalences talking about grit routes? We (generally, with some weird exceptions) don't allow bolting or sport climbing on grit, so of course a hanging rope clip up would not be legit.

On slate we allow sport climbs and we do insist on leading. This fits with those stylistic rules, but instead of clipping drilled metal he's clipped fixed loops. The Cry Freedom example isn't equivalent because we don't consider top roping to be legit style on limestone sport routes.

I don't recall anyone ever debating the point. I think it's a reasonable proposition to say that 'no bolts on grit' is principally about protecting the rock. In which case if someone wants to claim a sport route, without placing bolts, why shouldn't they?

Or maybe we just don't break the entire paradigm of UK climbing in order to accommodate one person's perverse addiction to controversy. :tease:

 

[Stabbsy]

If Franco went back and put bolts in exactly where the knotted loops were in his static, would people be less bothered about the validity of the ascent? If he'd claimed a lead of Indian Face [insert other bold trad route of choice here] then fair enough, but it's on a wall that's already bolted so I'm assuming there's no reason he can't place bolts wherever (disclaimer - I don't know the wall so unclear if there are existing trad routes to consider, etc.). If the real reason for not bolting it is that he wants to able to say he's never placed a bolt then that strikes me as a bit daft, but I'm really struggling to be questioning the ascent's validity.

If it was someone other than Franco, would the conversation be going the same way or would we be giving someone else a bit more leeway?

Todd Skinner also did a new route at Hueco like this in the early 90s - tensioned a knotted static line down the route with trad gear (I think some tube chocks/Big Bros in a couple of huecos) and clipped the drawers tied to the static line - I think because there was a ban on bolting. Don't know if it was bolted/re-led later.

Route was called Boys Town - it's on Moving Over Stone 2, towards the end. Can't find any reference to it on Mountain Project, so might have been renamed or might be that no-one sport climbs at Hueco now?

 

[SA Chris]

Or might have been highballed and renamed!

 

[andy moles]

If it was someone other than Franco, would the conversation be going the same way or would we be giving someone else a bit more leeway?

To be fair I think this would have raised eyebrows and been called out by some whoever did it, given its high publicity (and status as a cutting edge 'slab' climb). It's pretty odd.

 

[petejh]

If Franco went back and put bolts in exactly where the knotted loops were in his static, would people be less bothered about the validity of the ascent?

It's obviously a legit ascent of the moves. He's just done it in a style that's so poor and out of the ordinary when it was completely unnecessary - the wall's already covered in bolts! :wall:.

It's a classic 'if everyone else did it like that, climbing would be shit, that's why they don't do it like that'.

 

[abarro81]

As Bonjoy alluded to, is it not as much about the validity of the route in its current form as the validity of the ascent? If I do a new grit prow in this style can I give it a name and a sport grade? Most would say no I suspect, because it isn't really a sport route. What's the difference here? In the same sense is this really, currently, a sport route? If not, does it make sense to give it a name and a grade?

Interestingly boulder/route hybrids that can be done on bolts/gear or above pads are both boulder problems and routes in many ways, so maybe a route can be a sport route and a trad route at the same time? Schroedinger's route? It doesn't feel like that makes sense though

It's a classic 'if everyone else did it like that, climbing would be shit, that's why they don't do it like that'.

I like this way of summing it up!

 

[ali k]

If it was someone other than Franco, would the conversation be going the same way or would we be giving someone else a bit more leeway?

If it was someone other than Franco they'd have probably been honest about clipping a knotted rope from the start and this would have all just been a niche discussion about a weird hybrid way someone had chosen to climb a variation on Meltdown.
Either he genuinely thinks this is a completely legit way to climb something so he didn't think it was worth mentioning before it was written up on UKC as a bona fide uncontroversial FA, or he knew it would cast doubt on the legitimacy and take away from his achievement so chose to keep it hidden. All a bit odd!

 

[abarro81]

didn't think it was worth mentioning

This doesn't seem particularly credible

 

[Stabbsy]

If I do a new grit prow in this style can I give it a name and a sport grade? Most would say no I suspect, because it isn't really a sport route. What's the difference here? In the same sense is this really, currently, a sport route? If not, does it make sense to give it a name and a grade?

As Will mentioned, I don't think the grit route comparison is a great one. A big part of the grit "experience" is the boldness element determined by the rock. There's nothing to stop you claiming whatever you liked but it's further out of line with the prevailing ethics and so you might as well top rope it.

With this route it all seems a bit daft/pointless as there's no reason not to bolt it. I can't understand the logic that led to where we are, but I wouldn't call into question the validity of the route. If someone did similar on a limestone sport crag with no bolting bans, etc., I'd question their sanity/thought processes, but I wouldn't question the route's existence.

As an aside, back in the day I used to spend a lot of time at Red Wall in Trowbarrow. We considered this approach for "leading" the routes there for training purposes, because top-roping was getting a bit too easy. I'd never have claimed trad ascents of the routes, but I could see value in doing it to get a bit more mileage out of an overused bit of rock.

If it was someone other than Franco, would the conversation be going the same way or would we be giving someone else a bit more leeway?

If it was someone other than Franco they'd have probably been honest about clipping a knotted rope from the start and this would have all just been a niche discussion about a weird hybrid way someone had chosen to climb a variation on Meltdown.
Either he genuinely thinks this is a completely legit way to climb something so he didn't think it was worth mentioning before it was written up on UKC as a bona fide uncontroversial FA, or he knew it would cast doubt on the legitimacy and take away from his achievement so chose to keep it hidden. All a bit odd!

Yeah, probably agree with this. My natural thought when I see anything with Franco's name attached is "what's he done weird this time?". I just wondered whether that should be my nature reaction given how arbitrary a sport we operate in.