Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

Should there be handicaps?

Rocky

7-Jun-2005
12:48:13 PM

Hi all,

Just wondering what people think about there being handicaps for certain circumstances. Whether it is due to age, or being amputated in some way, i wonder whether there is room for some unwritten rule that states that if you're minus one arm, of if you are over 60, you can add a grade of two to the climbs you do, so that there can be an indication of how hard you can actually climb in relation to your abilities.

I hope this is interesting and opens up a new area of climbing not often thought about.

Cheers, Tim

P.S. I chose the age of 60, not to say that anyone over 60 can't climb competently any more, i just though it a rough age estimate. I hope also that the suggestion that being less one limb and not being able to climb as well isn't discriminating to anyone, because that is not what this is intended to be about. In fact i take my hat off anyone who is handicapped in such a way, and still climbs.
Feel free to suggest other reasonable ages, or handicap options.

Take!

10-Jun-2005
4:22:25 PM

This is so silly.

However there is a long dyno boulder problem I know of that has a 'handicap grade'. Can't remember the exact system but its something like V2 then add one grade for every 2 inches under 6 foot.

mousey

10-Jun-2005
4:36:54 PM

as the top end of grades arepushed ever harder, it IS true that we are seeing a lot of hard stuff that is very body type dependant...but that doesnt mean there should be handicaps!!!! it just means that one person will find that type of problem harder, eg. anything hawkshaw has put up will be 'sandbagged' to wo/man of normal stature :P
but then he probablycant highstep as well as many shorter climbers, so it kinda balances out, and everyone develops strengths and weaknesses in terms of the type of routes/problms they are capable of. thats just given.
as for more extreme differences such as having one arm etc. it just means your limit will be lower all around, and unless you're in the game to compare yourself to those around you then there is no probs with that! for mepersonallyi climbtopush MYSELF, so if i were to lose a leg etc, i wouldnt expct to climb the same grades but i would still be just as happy pushing myself at my newfound limit
if you've bothreed reading through all that crap, you are way too bored ad need to find yaselves new jobs

IdratherbeclimbingM9

10-Jun-2005
7:10:23 PM

>climbtopush MYSELF
Right on!
The biggest handicap is the mind of the participant, all other things being equal!

KP

10-Jun-2005
7:37:55 PM

handclaps are cool

steph

11-Jun-2005
1:24:40 PM

I dunno I'm in 2 minds about it. i certainly understand the frustration of height issues especially when bouldering and i could never understand a harsher disability. but i reckon it'd b imprssive enuf if you take into account a person's handicap when looking at their ticklist. If you start adding handicap grades (which would have to differ depending on the disability) then a really awesome climber under 6 foot would suddenly be able to do a grade 36 or something equally as ridiculous. I guess at the moment if someone says "grade 21" nomatter what the context, you can get an imidiate idea of the climb difficulty for the average person. If handicap grades entered the system so would a lot of confusion.

In one sense, it seems only fair to have them, in another it could undermine the grading system. I dunno where I'm goin with this but that's my thoughts for the day.

Steph

Zebedee

11-Jun-2005
4:41:55 PM

No, I can't refrain from posting any longer. Grades are an indication of difficulty that's all. If you have climbed a fair few routes and are blind, one armed, one legged or lack b*lls then you know what the grade means to you. The only reason that people want a 'handicap grade' is so that they can boast about it. "It was 22 and I cruised it even though I had a hangover, blisters, my brother just died and I had a fractured skull and a brain tumour ..... ." This has been covered before on this site and the truth of the matter is that some routes are hard for you and some are easy for you and some are impossible for you and the grade is just a number.

sabu

11-Jun-2005
4:54:29 PM

lol yea i agree with u on this issue Zebedee!!!

steph

11-Jun-2005
5:22:57 PM

Yep Zeb after reading that, i understand my own thoughts on the issue too. lol thanx that's an achievement.

rhinckle

13-Jun-2005
7:28:07 AM

if the rocks could read some of the tripe that gets dished up here, they'd spit us all off. (yes i include myself in this, being guilty of both serving it up and consuming it)
on second thoughts, they'd just keep on ignoring us puny mortals, while the geckos keep on laughing at our pretentions.

i think a more pertinant question would be:
Should there be grades at all?

earwig

14-Jun-2005
10:13:54 AM

I work on three grades - know I can, think I can, and no way.

sabu

14-Jun-2005
10:42:47 AM

On 13/06/2005 rhinckle wrote:
>i think a more pertinant question would be:
>Should there be grades at all?

how else would u know if ur heading for an epic or not?

steph

14-Jun-2005
3:09:48 PM

On 13/06/2005 rhinckle wrote:
>i think a more pertinant question would be:
>Should there be grades at all?

I actually find I can onsight much harder stuff than usual when I choose not to know the grade. It's all in my head I reckon. Once, indoors I climbed something and topped it only because I feared it would turn out to be a 14 and I'd be laughed at by all my friends if I fell. When I got down I was told it was a 21 and that became a PB for me. That's probably another reason you climb better in comps - you literally have no idea what the grade.

IdratherbeclimbingM9

14-Jun-2005
4:48:07 PM

On 14/06/2005 earwig wrote:
>I work on three grades - know I can, think I can, and no way.
I have a fourth:
No way, but I'd like to try.

Steph said;
>I actually find I can onsight much harder stuff than usual when I choose not to know the grade. It's all in my head I reckon.
... and once you have fired it, then you are well set up to go further!
I find the same in aid. If you are not familiar with how 'hard' it is 'supposed' to be and you control the head in managing to get up it, then the next grade comes more easily.

Rocky

17-Jun-2005
11:23:43 AM

On 11/06/2005 Zebedee wrote:
If you have climbed a fair few routes and are blind, one armed, one legged or lack b*lls then you know what the grade means to you.

thats basically what i think it should mean, that they have an idea of how hard they can climb in relation to their abilities. look at Lance Armstrong, 6 time Tour de France winner, only has on b*ll...?! each to his own opinion.

In regards to it being covered before, i did that search before starting a topic, searched for "handicap" it didnt find anything...?!

dalai

17-Jun-2005
11:39:00 AM

On 17/06/2005 Rocky wrote:
look at Lance Armstrong,
>6 time Tour de France winner, only has on b*ll...?! each to his own opinion.

Though the cancer which resulted in the loss made him a better Tour cyclist. From being a heavier good one day classics rider, to the lightweight, alround cyclist he is today... Eddy Merckx still was the better cyclist as he maybe now doesn't hold the record for the most tour wins, but he raced all events and has a huge list of wins rather than just focussing on the Tour only!

Tour de France is only 14 sleeps away, then every stage live and no sleep for the following three weeks!!

Sorry, little exited...

Zabeedee is right. There is no need or point for a 'handicap' system. The grade given is merely a guide to the difficulty of the route. This will vary anyway based on physiological differences of people without these so called handicaps.

BA

17-Jun-2005
12:59:54 PM

On 17/06/2005 dalai wrote:

>Though the cancer which resulted in the loss made him a better Tour cyclist.
>From being a heavier good one day classics rider, to the lightweight, alround
>cyclist he is today... Eddy Merckx still was the better cyclist as he maybe
>now doesn't hold the record for the most tour wins, but he raced all events
>and has a huge list of wins rather than just focussing on the Tour only!

A bit like doing a lot of climbing and dogging every route you do so that you become strong and then just throw laps of the one climb in a 'clean style'. A bit like the sprinters who quit the Tour when the hills loom. A bit like people who only go for crimpfests/power routes/etc. Where is the off-width specialist or the tight body-chimney specialists?

My handicap is myself and I don't want me imposed on anyone!!

>Tour de France is only 14 sleeps away, then every stage live and no sleep
>for the following three weeks!!

How you getting it live Dalai? SBS only have a couple of nights live don't they?

dalai

17-Jun-2005
1:11:35 PM

On 17/06/2005 BA wrote:

>How you getting it live Dalai? SBS only have a couple of nights live don't
>they?

SBS are providing EVERY stage Live this year... Will even be given priority over the cricket!

Watched the Giro last month via live streaming and daily highlights provided by RaiTV (Italian TV station)...

And yes StuckInUK, I am jealous about your Eurosport coverage!! Though you won't have that when you come back to Australia

Errr - Vote No Climbing Grade Handicaps...

gfdonc

17-Jun-2005
2:29:39 PM

On 17/06/2005 dalai wrote:
>SBS are providing EVERY stage Live this year... Will even be given priority
>over the cricket!

Well this is awesome but frightening news. Work will have to be put on hold, for sure.

There are 19 messages in this topic.