Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Crag & Route Beta

Crag & Route Beta

Area	Location	Sub Location	Crag	Links
VIC Grampians	Northern	(General)	(General)	[ Grampians Guide \| Images ]

Topic Date User

Iskra Crag update 9-Aug-2017 At 7:11:42 PM IdratherbeclimbingM9

Message

On 8/08/2017 Dave J wrote:
>On 8/08/2017 Goshen wrote:
>>What about route names though? The boulder names are way better than
>>the aid names... but is it right to make that call? Obviously they are
>>shitty routes (if aided); but awesome boulder problems. But we wouldn't
>>having this discussion if the routes were significant - whoever comes
>>along and free's a route doesn't get to rename it (normally).
>
>I think its generally ccepted that the first person to free climb a route
>can give it a name. Often if its been an aid route of some significance,
>the person who's freed it sticks with the original name but not always
>(snip)

When I first read this I thought to myself; what a load of sanctimonious claptrap...
Then I thought; the next generations need educating; ... and further, I was surprised and a little disappointed that this line of thought was coming from a climber that I respect!

Tell me Dave J, how would you feel if someone retroed a route you put up?
In my opinion, retro-bolting and retro-naming are not dis-similar!

On 9/08/2017 Dave J wrote:
>Ive honsetly never heard that changing the names of old aid lines when you freed them was unaccaptable. The various aid lines I've freed I've
>always left the name because I liked the history that it came with that.
>But I was lways under the impression that I had chosen to do that...In
>never realised there was a rule. Other historical interactions with the
>rock that have been acknowledged by the first free ascentionist include
>vandals carving their name athe the bottom of the rock (Madge McDonald
>etc). As far as Im aware there's no rule in australia that says you need
>to do this either but it is another nice way to add a sense of hirstory
>to a route.
>

BA's response was accurate but lightweight enough that I feel that you (and perhaps others), didn't get the point he was making, so I will be more blunt in my response.
Retro naming a route is theft (and inconsiderate), pure and simple.
Don't do it.

>>A 6m aid route doesn't have many points of aid in it, does it?
>
Ah, this raises an interesting twist to the theme, and also a grey area where I am happy to compromise on my stated position outlined above.

I will give two examples that have different outcomes.
1. Sometimes aid was practiced on scrappy out of the way places (before the genre of 'bouldering' existed), and so the routes were of no 'real' significance to the first ascentionists...
In this case I doubt the first ascentionists would object to a renaming under the title of a new 'bouldering ascent'.

2. I thought long and hard before submitting for publishing in a guidebook a first ascent aid line I put up on a 10 m boulder at Mt Buffalo.
(Side note: BA is well familiar with it as he had tried it on aid many years previous to my successful ascent...)
Initially I thought a line of only 10 m isn't worth writing up.
What swayed me to submit it for publication was two things, first being a free line on the other side of the boulder already written up (actually one of two lines!).
The second was that (believe it or not) there exists a small but devoted group of people who actually still enjoy aid climbing and this particular line filled a grade niche that has bugger-all examples to aspire to for those adherents...
In this case, I'd be well miffed if it was renamed after a bouldering ascent, even though I acknowledge that this style of ascent is possible in the future...

In days of yore I practiced aid in scrappy locations, but none of the lines have been written up as I prefer them to remain as adventures for future generations. If they are bouldered cleanly as new lines then so be it, and the new ascentionists can have their moment of fame.
☺

As a side note, I observe with a degree of chagrin-tempered amusement that free-climbs I and others established at a 'scrappy' location near Talong NSW, have since been safety-ised with bolts and claimed as first ascents by others!
I will be further amused if others come along later and miff those involved by further safety-ising 'their' routes, and possibly renaming them with the new lower standard of the day!!

By the way, my cohorts and I didn't write them up as new lines (even though some of them were), because we respected the real first ascentionists before us, that we knew had done stuff there, but we were unsure as to exactly what!

>As boulder problems they are a significant contribution to grampians climbing
>and something that people are aspiring to do. I would vote for listing
>the boulder problems that have been established on this wall (thats what
>people wil be going there for) and add the aid climbing history as an interesting
>footnote.

If the aid routes in question were put up as proper lines rather than practice only, then I disagree. They should retain their name and the first free ascent is noted as an 'interesting footnote'!
If they were put up as aid practice sessions, then it becomes a free for all and a clean bouldering ascent is valid for a first naming of the line involved.