Kingy said:WSS is 7B+ to me at least. I find it desparate as do many people of average height. A lot of folk are calling it Font 7C. Its been E4 7a in the routes guidbook for many years.abarro81 said:[
Except you said WSS and Blind Date are 7a... neither of which have a 7B move on (or even close).
Re Blind Date, an old Al Rouse route from the 80's originally done with a 'splits' stance off an old long- deparated boulder has been Font 7B+ ever since the Peak Bouldering 2005 guidebook and has been E4 7a in the routes guide for many years.
Again, for those of average height, I would say not many would dispute the 7B+ grade. FWIW, 21 votes on UKC for 7B+!
Stu Littlefair said:The correct answer is clearly E grade with French grade for sustained routes and E grade with font grade for bouldery ones.
This would have the neat side effect of stopping people mixing up 6a and 6A so bloody often.
Kingy said:I see what you're saying. I think we need to take 'single move' with a pinch of salt here. Blind Date is 5 hand moves in total to the end of the difficulties. I have no issue with calling that English 7a. I think its splitting hairs to say that we need to break it down further into the grade of each hand move. I take a pragmatic approach here to the 'single move' aspect. Basically, I would use the Font system in a similar way to the English tech for short problems of 5 moves or below .
Similarly with WSS, that would be about 5 hard hand moves alll adding up to 7a.
If we were talking about 10 moves then we're into the 'sustained nature of multiple moves e.g. Powerband. That would be a different kettle of fish....
spidermonkey09 said:I think this is the crux (lol) of it. I don't agree with using the tech grade for grading short hard sequences. as Pete has said that is literally what the font grade is good for. that is borne out by the fact that nobody knows WSS as e4 7a, they know it as font 7B+. It seems very retrograde in that context to continue using the tech grade where it starts to make no sense, ie from 6c upwards. Below that it works fine.
Which was exactly my impeccable and undeniable logic (amongst other reasons) which V grades were objectively superior. I spent about 20 minutes trying to find a blogpost a wrote on it but couldn't. I did find one where the entire first paragraph was calling every possible variety of boulderer a cunt, so that's something.SA Chris said:Was explaining the difference between 7A probs and 7a routes to some young guys who were struggling with the idea at the wall, can we change that too while we are at it?
Kingy said:spidermonkey09 said:I think this is the crux (lol) of it. I don't agree with using the tech grade for grading short hard sequences. as Pete has said that is literally what the font grade is good for. that is borne out by the fact that nobody knows WSS as e4 7a, they know it as font 7B+. It seems very retrograde in that context to continue using the tech grade where it starts to make no sense, ie from 6c upwards. Below that it works fine.
I can remember trying WSS in 2000 when it was B9 or 7a in the Al Williams Peak bouldering guide before I even knew what Font 7B+ meant. I certainly understood the difficulty of the problem from 7a. Its always been applied in a 'holistic' sense to short series of hand moves. I think its a mistake to try to apply it too literally. I don't see the need to slavishly insist on the tech grade being only 1 hand move. Font grades being for short sequences of moves doesn't mean English tech grades can't be too (to a certain limited extent).
I don't think we can say that the whole English tech grade was ever meant for one hand move! What about pitches at Gogarth, surely a few strung together was what was meant by 'the hardest move'? I am a pragmatist, not a purist 8)
The English tech grade may be old and wide but I don't accept that it makes no sense. Worked fine for me!
crimpinainteasy said:how come a 7C and 8B boulder can both get the same tech grade, since such a huge grade discrepcancy guarantees the crux sequence on the latter is much harder?
i_a_coops said:Angel's share (considered 7C above pads?) and Hubble (can't remember if it's considered 8B or 8B+) are both tech 7b then? Jobs a good'un.
petejh said:That's some E9 bullshit.
Kingy said:
with time, and a growing number of repeat assents will settle to a position which allows would be climbers some indication of the challenge ahead.
SA Chris said:Was explaining the difference between 7A probs and 7a routes to some young guys who were struggling with the idea at the wall, can we change that too while we are at it?
In agreement with your general point, I think it can also be true for some well protected but very sustained easier routes too. Swanage has classic E4 5cs, E3 5bs etc that are super sustained, burly and with unlimited idiot-proof protection (can place as many rock8s etc as you can carry). They would get the same sport grade as many E4 6b, E3 6a routes.duncan said:"Breaking a pitch into individual moves and rating the pitch by the hardest move is nonsense."
Jim Bridwell (The Innocent, The Ignorant And The Insecure. Ascent 1973)
It is time to thank the UK tech. grade for decades of loyal service and send it off to retirement. It works well for move-rest-move-rest climbing but the activity has changed and it is now obsolete. As a guide to physical difficulty, a French grade is clearly more informative for routes above about E3/ UK6a and is different but just as useful on easier ones.