what's Hot Toddy RH?

[stone]

I'm a bit confused by the 2023 RockFax guide and UKC descriptions of Hot Toddy and Hot Toddy RH at Froggat.

My guess at what is meant is that Hot Toddy was first done reaching out left for sidepulls once at the big sloper. Then from those sidepulls they reached back right to a jug, then the top. That was a super 7A+.

Then people started instead just lurching straight from the sloper to the jug straight above, missing out all the fun side pull action and so deemed the problem a much less good 7A.

The guide now lists this latter beta as a variant at 7A (called Hot Toddy RH) and the "proper problem" as a three star 7A+ even though it is only the easier Hot Toddy RH that is "eliminate". So it is a pinches wall type scenario where you have to include extra holds to get the experience, grade, stars, tick, etc.

If I'm not in a muddle about this, I'm not sure it is in the spirit of Alpinism. It also fits oddly into the general situation. Short arses lacking spring use extra holds on many/most problems. The Nose and Mermaid at Burbage can give fun extra moves that taller and more dynamic climbers miss. I've seen a 2m tall climber do two laps on The Nose, once with the tall beta and once with the short arse both feet toe-hooking beta. But it would be daft to have that as the described rule wouldn't it?

I'm sure in the Hot Toddy case especially, the first ascentionist could have climbed up and down the problem all day using any combination of holds.

Like I said, I may just be mis-reading the guide etc. If so it would be great to be put right.

 

[Bonjoy]

Yes, you read it correctly. It's a bit like Powerband and the much less popular low variant which was documented as an easier variant, or West Side Story/Ronside Force-It, and plenty of other less famous examples.
The main function of listing inferior easier variants IMO is to improve people's enjoyment of a problem (social engineering) by removing the temptation to do an easier but crapper version just for the quick tick value.
There is added complexity in this case though. The RH version is quite reach based, so only accessible for the long of arm anyway and therefore no easier or even harder the smaller you are. Plus when the RH version was recorded there was a dead tree and some blocks out left which spoiled original version somewhat.
There is plenty of precedent for eliminate versions of things being considered the default version of a problem and recieving more stars than the no rules version, and personally I think that's right and completely in the spirit of bouldering. Like you allude to, this isn't alpine ridge climbing.

 

[stone]

Thanks, that's great. I mostly just wanted to check that the three star way wasn't eliminating the jug or anything. I didn't think so, but had a lurking doubt.

 

[Johnny Brown]

I've never understood the popularity of this problem, much less the 'three-star' status, but equally I don't see much downside in hordes camping out on lesser problems.

Not sure Ron-side is a great example - it traverses in half-way up. The version of Ron's I do eliminates all the arete holds but it's pretty arbitrary. Whereas if you start at the accepted start for West side it's simply not an option to get out to the big hold on Ron's.

 

[cofe]

I thought RH referred to the finish, i.e. the move from the edge rail on the lip, regardless of how you got there. Maybe because you had to finish right due to the remnants of the tree; can't remember. The IMO better and slightly harder finish moves up the RH blunt rib from the rail with a tricky little match on another sloper, then a jug, rather than the more ungainly finish left on jugs. Decent problem, but not three stars however it's climbed.

 

[Fiend]

The spirit of Alpinism :lol:

I was just chatting to another UKBer yesterday about how fun it is having you posting regularly stone...

 

[Bonjoy]

I've never done Ronside. I was going off the guide texts 'from the start of WSS' go right then back left. Like Hot Toddy RH there's a common start and finish with a variant RH bit in between. I always just assumed it existed to deprive people of a WSS tick for using unapproved beta :.

 

[Bonjoy]

I thought RH referred to the finish, i.e. the move from the edge rail on the lip, regardless of how you got there. Maybe because you had to finish right due to the remnants of the tree; can't remember. The IMO better and slightly harder finish moves up the RH blunt rib from the rail with a tricky little match on another sloper, then a jug, rather than the more ungainly finish left on jugs. Decent problem, but not three stars however it's climbed.

No, the rh was done by Iain Farrar originally, he went pretty much straight up off one of the first holds bypassing the nose altogether. I repeated it just after. It's okay and leads into the better finish moves, but feels like you aren't climbing the feature.
I agree it's over popular relative to IMO better things around the grade at Froggatt. It deffo benefits/suffers from being easily found, approached, padded, and living next door to popular warm ups. We all know convenience trumps all other virtues for boulderers.

 

[stone]

I'm always interested in what makes a problem (or route) star-spangled. My impression was that it's a mix between funky movements, consistent difficulty, lack of annoyance (sharp holds, dab risk etc) and "Alpinistic-criteria" such as soaring line, not-being eliminate etc.

To me, Hot Toddy scores really highly on all but the Alpinistic stuff where it's admittedly pants.

 

[Bonjoy]

I'd agree with that. It depends where you want to set the bar though. Some areas/guides are more generous than others. Too much in either direction is either not very useful, or a recipe for disappointment.
In practice though most three star probs fall down to some extent on at least one of those measures, nature rarely produces perfection. Often stunning visual line have grim holds or moves, but end up with the stars anyway. My preference is for imperfection of line with great moves if I have to pick a defect. As such I'm quite tolerant of problems with simple coherent rules to fix their greatness e.g. defined start holds as opposed to simply a stand/sit start.

 

[SA Chris]

Decent problem, but not three stars however it's climbed.

Write a strongly worded letter to the guide book publishers