Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Topic Date User

Australian Grading 25-Aug-2009 At 12:23:47 AM mattjr

Message

You tell us, it was a pom that came up with it! ;)

perhaps this will help...
(i) History. The so-called "Ewbank" grading system now almost universally used in Australia dates from the mid '60s, and is the brainchild of John Ewbank, a climber from the state of New South Wales. (NSW) Prior to that the English scheme of grading climbs as "easy", "hard"....."hard very severe" was in use. I have a copy of the first printed guide to Mt Arapiles, which lists about 100 climbs, the hardest being "extremely hard very severe". It is of interest that that climb is graded 16 (5.8). The Ewbank system described below) has several advantages: (i) It is very easy to understand and use (important for Australians :=) :=) etc), (ii) It is concise, unlike the descriptive system it replaced and, (iii) It has (had) no inbuilt bottleneck (at 5.10) that the yosemite decimal system has. Having said that, there was a sticking point around the grade 18 mark, and it was some time before it was generally accepted that harder grades had appeared, and as a consequence, there are some pretty solid 18's around. Note also that a "death on a stick" runout 20 and a "wimpy sport climb" with bolts every two metres which is also 20 are not distinguished between in the grading system. Look for the written description.

(ii) A general description. There are no equivalents of class 1 - class 4 in the Australian climbing grading (that I know of), all grades being assigned to technical rock climbs. The free climbing grading is an open (upper) ended quantized system, from grade 1 up (the highest being 32 for now). Grade 1 is very easy, lots of good big holds, and I have seen small children happily solo on a 1. Generally, most people would be happy unroped on anything up to 4, unless it is exposed. (A slight caveat is required here: somtimes I think climbers who are capable of high grades have used routes as an access, and off-handedly graded them as "1 or 2", whereas they are more like 8-9). Most beginners, top-roped, would be able to handle anything up to 12 or so, which corresponds (roughly) to 5.6. Grades 12-18 are for "sometimes climbers" or solid first or second year climbers, though 17-18 is getting hard enough. (Roughly 5.9) A climber who spends most weekends climbing would be looking at 20 or so, and the limit for weekend climbers appears to be 23-24. (5.11d) Of course, these are generalizations. A surprising number of people seem to be getting into the 25-28 range, but 29-32 is still very much for the elite.

Mechanical grades: I can't resist quoting from a guide book to the Grampians (Victoria). "Like the free grades, the mechanical grading system is open ended, grades ranging from M1 up, though there are fewer of them." Not a mathematician. In practice, mechanical grades range from M1 (bolt ladders), M2 (bolts + ocassional easy nut placement)....M8 (touch and go hook moves &/or dicey small nut (RP) placements). A climb that is free in parts, with some aid, will be graded : "Ozymandias, 22 M4" in a fairly self-explanatory notation.

(iii) Comparisons. It has been my feeling for a while that Australian climbs were in fact a bit stiffer than the usual conversion tables indicate. (This refers to North American grades, I don't really know about European ones). Conversations I have had both here and in the US seem to back up this view. It is interesting that a recent US magazine article took the tack that Australians were habitual sandbaggers, rather than the (I think) more accurate view that the standard conversions are not completely reliable. General advice would be to pick a climb that is a couple of grades below where you think you are, and go from there.

(iv) Idiosynchratic Grades. The Australian sytem seems to be quite consistent from cliff to cliff, though as with any system there will be oddities. There does seem to have been one or two prominent climbers who sandbagged routinely (Editors note: divine retribution caught up with one of them), but recent guidebooks have ironed out some of the worst excesses. An ongoing problem is the 24 leader who puts up a new "16". As readers will appreciate, it is often hard to accurately grade a climb much below your ability, and I have found examples of climbs being 3 or so grades above their nominal rating. By and large, this is only a big problem at new cliffs, and it will pay to read the historical notes in the preface of most guide books. Some cliffs are intrinsically odd, and grades there might seem severe to newcomers (I gather the Gunks in the US is like this), but experience usually shows that the grades are about right. An example is Bundaleer (Vic), where the climbing is very steep, and quite intimidating.