Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - Climbing Videos

Post links and comments about your favourite climbing flicks

Author

Burly Toru Nakajima on Grit

kieranl

30-Aug-2012
9:00:51 PM

On 30/08/2012 Duang Daunk wrote:

>1983 huh. The brits hadnt heard of John Gill at that time then?
I am sure they had. It was before John Sherman had seen The Terminator and all the dire consequences that ensued.

One Day Hero

30-Aug-2012
9:05:11 PM

Ok Kieran, you've got me interested. What happened after John Sherman watched Terminator?

kieranl

30-Aug-2012
9:18:57 PM

According to a piece he wrote (Climbing or R&I) it was the occasion of some sort of epiphany. It was something like :
A friend he thought was really cool invited him to a movie and it turned out to be Terminator and they really enjoyed it. This appeared to him as some sort of revelation that you could actually enjoy a good movie even though it had Arnold Shwarzenegger in it and still be a cool pseudo-intellectual wanker.
OK, I paraphrase. From there it was but a short leap to V grades.
As life-changing experiences go, it's not high on the profundity list.


wallwombat

30-Aug-2012
10:13:15 PM

Gold!

Nick Clow

31-Aug-2012
8:37:45 AM

Amazing climbing - super precise and fluent - and an inspiring story.

> bet the kid also probably did a bunch of onsighting and ground up trad climbing

The article says he onsighted some E5s, Life Assurance E6 but had a ground fall trying to onsight Ulysses E6 (headpointed FA by Jerry Moffatt, then famously onsighted by Johnny Dawes. This was 20 years ago - no mats in those days.)

Interesting that Ron Fawcett is his hero. I think Ron must have visited Japan, perhaps in the early 80s? By the sound if it he made an impression. In the Glowacz book, there is picture of Glowacz in Japan climbing an arete called Fawcett's Edge or similar.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

31-Aug-2012
9:31:10 AM

On 30/08/2012 simey wrote:
>I don't know what you are smoking M9, but I reckon you should give some to Macciza.
>
The bloke who started this thread (egosan) was given ~~some~~ opportunity. It's powerful stuff and you can read about his experience here, ... particularly his description of the first ascent of Division of Labour!
;-)

anthonycuskelly

31-Aug-2012
9:36:30 AM

M9: understood, just wasn't too clear to me in your original. I don't mind boulderers or aid climbers... it's those pesky trad climbers on the same things I want to do that annoy me :D

Remember technical grade is the important bit for translating from British: E5 could be anywhere from about 21 to 26, though probably at the lower end on grit (they tend to be bolder). Life Assurance is E6 6b (so, bloody bold), so the guy's onsighting a 24/25 with negligible gear. That's awesome.


pmonks

31-Aug-2012
10:02:29 AM

On 30/08/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>I pretty much know my onsight limit

I find this phenomenon fascinating. Over the years I've found my "envelope" between "99% certain I can onsight it" and "impossible" to have shrunk virtually to nothing (to within 2 or 3 grades). Disclaimer: I find redpointing mind numbingly boring, so don't bother with that style of ascent much.

In contrast when I was a bumbly I found everything desperate and scary and had about the same chance of success on a 12 as on a 22, which tells me it's got to be at least partly psychological.

Has anyone else noticed this and wondered what it's all about?

[postscript: the fact that I spend more time thinking about this kind of thing than actually climbing probably speaks volumes too...]

anthonycuskelly

31-Aug-2012
10:32:48 AM

Continuing the thread drift: I find it depends on the day, and that it's mostly psychological. On a reasonable day though, I'd agree on 2-3 grades (and that I tend not to redpoint much).


nmonteith

31-Aug-2012
11:26:23 AM

On 31/08/2012 pmonks wrote:
>On 30/08/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>>I pretty much know my onsight limit
>
>I find this phenomenon fascinating. Over the years I've found my "envelope"
>between "99% certain I can onsight it" and "impossible" to have shrunk
>virtually to nothing (to within 2 or 3 grades). Disclaimer: I find redpointing
>mind numbingly boring, so don't bother with that style of ascent much.
>
>In contrast when I was a bumbly I found everything desperate and scary
>and had about the same chance of success on a 12 as on a 22, which tells
>me it's got to be at least partly psychological.

Yep! I know exactly what you mean. I can usually onsight 22 on trad every single time, 23 about half the time and 24 never. And i've been like that for 10 years!


nmonteith

31-Aug-2012
11:27:51 AM

RE: 'onsighting' aid routes. Do you blow your onsight if a piece fails and you fall? How do you 'fail' on an aid onsight?


nmonteith

31-Aug-2012
11:29:44 AM

On 30/08/2012 One Day Hero wrote:
>Ok Kieran, you've got me interested. What happened after John Sherman watched
>Terminator?

I was hoping this was going to be a revelation about John Sherman taking up steroids. Damn.

simey

31-Aug-2012
11:36:36 AM

On 31/08/2012 nmonteith wrote:
>RE: 'onsighting' aid routes. Do you blow your onsight if a piece fails and you fall? How do you 'fail' on an aid onsight?

This is why the term 'ground-up' should be used more frequently to distinguish style-of-ascent from the overly used term 'onsighting'.

Nick Clow

31-Aug-2012
11:48:39 AM

> I can usually onsight 22 on trad every single time

That's tortology!


nmonteith

31-Aug-2012
12:07:40 PM

On 31/08/2012 Nick Clow wrote:
>> I can usually onsight 22 on trad every single time
>
>That's tortology!

I like turtles.

One Day Hero

31-Aug-2012
12:10:23 PM

If you go and get on Jezebel at Ikara and Julius Caesar down this way (both 22), your turtle will probably end up a little worse for wear.

Nick Clow

31-Aug-2012
1:03:38 PM

Monarch at Buffalo, Incipience in Tas, Steel Fingers and Child in Time at Frog would be other nominations for anyone who can onsight 22s 'every single time' (usually). :)


IdratherbeclimbingM9

31-Aug-2012
1:28:53 PM

On 31/08/2012 nmonteith wrote:
>>RE: 'onsighting' aid routes. Do you blow your onsight if a piece fails and you fall? How do you 'fail' on an aid onsight?

The same way that one can fail on a freeclimb onsight.
This leads to similar quantification regarding grading ascents from easiest to hardest onsights, amongst the cognoscenti!

On 31/08/2012 simey wrote:
>This is why the term 'ground-up' should be used more frequently to distinguish style-of-ascent from the overly used term 'onsighting'.
>
True.

On 31/08/2012 pmonks wrote:
>it's got to be at least partly psychological.

I agree.

>Has anyone else noticed this and wondered what it's all about?

Yes, often.
As an aside, there are a number of threads on Chocky that touch on the subject, but not too many definitive answers came from them!


Macciza

31-Aug-2012
1:50:05 PM

On 31/08/2012 nmonteith wrote:
>RE: 'onsighting' aid routes. Do you blow your onsight if a piece fails
>and you fall? How do you 'fail' on an aid onsight?

Yep - exactly the same as in any other climbing . . .

Oh and it's Tautology, when you repeat something again, and again . . .
Tortolgy does not refer to Tortoises either, but to infringement of rights and legal liability . .

anthonycuskelly

31-Aug-2012
2:19:46 PM

Macca (I see what you did there), I thought Tortology referred to tortes? Those tasty, tasty cakes...

There are 67 messages in this topic.