Author |
|
23-Feb-2009 9:56:21 AM
|
Can anyone tell me the grade of Agemmenmon at araps. don't have my guide but need to know asap. Thanks in advance.
|
23-Feb-2009 10:01:32 AM
|
10
|
23-Feb-2009 10:02:35 AM
|
I thought it was grade 10, but the ACA website says 11:
http://www.climb.org.au/index.php?page_id=10&action=area&area_id=635
|
23-Feb-2009 10:05:37 AM
|
11 in the new mentz/tempest guide, 10 in the old one
|
23-Feb-2009 3:24:35 PM
|
I reckon you can find it as 9 if you look in older guides ...
|
23-Feb-2009 4:58:17 PM
|
probably V Diff.. will check even older guides.. :-)
|
23-Feb-2009 4:59:59 PM
|
probably french 4c. lets keep confusing him
|
23-Feb-2009 5:36:15 PM
|
May I suggest a scientific approach to grading climbs. I wore a friend's heart rate monitor at Morialta on
Saturday for fun and he sent through the rate vs. time graphs, which got me thinking. If we assume that
physical effort and exposure (generating anxiety) is reflected in your heart rate, then a combination of the
peak rate, the area-under-the-curve and perhaps other parameters could give a value (x) corresponding to
a grade (g). A number of benchmark climbs (by consensus) would be onsighted (eg. D Minor for g = 15,
Kachoong for g = 21, Trojan for g = 25, etc) to generate a curve of x vs. g. New climbs or climbs of
debatable grade would be onsighted, x calculated and g read off the graph.
Using an approach such as this, I wouldn't be surprised if Agamemnon was proven to be a sandbag
compared to other grade 10's given the exposure factor!
|
23-Feb-2009 6:02:15 PM
|
On 23/02/2009 mikepatt wrote:
>probably V Diff.. will check even older guides.. :-)
>
HVD actually - Hard Very Difficult - and when the Ewbank grades were introduced it was originally graded 7. So harden up youse lot :-)
|