Chockstone Forum

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

Chockstone Photography

Australian Landscape Prints

Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

Author

Climb Quality - how do you rate it?

kieranl

12-Sep-2012
1:48:14 PM

On 12/09/2012 nmonteith wrote:
>On 12/09/2012 Superstu wrote:
>>Quality climbs are
>snip
>>ultimately a memorable experience.
>
>I like that.
Watchtower Crack and Skink are good examples. The shared first half (50 metres) of these climbs is nothing special but they are still really good. The traverse under the overhang hits you with the full 50 metres of exposure and sets the atmosphere for the next 50 metres.


Eduardo Slabofvic

12-Sep-2012
1:53:49 PM

On 12/09/2012 Estey wrote:
>
>Over starring should be opposed at all costs

There's a ten star route I like to do up Tiger wall at Araps.

No Future into Resignation into Scorpion Corner into Quo Vardis.

I guess that means I get to rename the route, retro bolt it and over grade it now.


pmonks

12-Sep-2012
1:56:19 PM

On 12/09/2012 Eduardo Slabofvic. wrote:
>There's a ten star route I like to do up Tiger wall at Araps.
>
>No Future into Resignation into Scorpion Corner into Quo Vardis.
>
>I guess that means I get to rename the route, retro bolt it and over grade
>it now.

You owe Stu $1000.


Superstu

12-Sep-2012
2:12:33 PM

On 12/09/2012 pmonks wrote:

>Given what I said over here I'd be interested in seeing
>whether rocking up and just trying whatever looked good and achievable,
>without knowing a grade, would help get over the psychological block that
>grades impose. Maybe that's one of the unique attractions of doing ground
>up first ascents?

Anybody else noticed that if you repeat a route in the guidebook you have endless opinions about its grade and star rating.... But after a first ascent (particularly a ground up onsight) i'm bamboozled on grade and qwality. All my new routes are graded 17 or 19 and get one star.... Regardless of their actual grade or quality, of which i have no idea (could be anywhere between 12 and 22)

kieranl

12-Sep-2012
2:25:11 PM

I find it very hard to assess grade and quality of new routes. I try to err on the side of overgrading, and am usually wildly successful.
There's probably some profound psychological reason for this lack of objectivity; it couldn't just be ego, could it?


nmonteith

12-Sep-2012
2:29:49 PM

On 12/09/2012 ajfclark wrote:
>On 12/09/2012 pmonks wrote:
>>would help get over the psychological block that grades impose.
>
>I find the opposite sometimes applies too. "That looks impossible for
>me but the book says it's X..."

I agree. With a guide I would attempt a lot more sketchy looking routes than without.


IdratherbeclimbingM9

12-Sep-2012
2:34:51 PM

On 12/09/2012 Superstu wrote:
>All my new routes are graded 17 or 19 and get one or no star.... Regardless of their actual grade or quality

Yeah?

;-)

Regarding new routes; ... at the risk of stating the obvious, ... the people doing those are not following a guide other than to know where not to climb!


Superstu

12-Sep-2012
2:42:07 PM

On 12/09/2012 IdratherbeclimbingM9 wrote:
>On 12/09/2012 Superstu wrote:
>>All my new routes are graded 17 or 19 and get one or no star.... Regardless
>of their actual grade or quality
>
>Yeah?
>

Must have been a typo.

19 if my second falls and 17 if they don't.

One Day Hero

12-Sep-2012
3:07:50 PM

I'm having trouble dealing with the concept of overgrading resulting in higher popularity. What the fuch is the matter with people? Are they that eager for a pat on the head, and the hollow reassurance that they really are a good climber?

kieranl

12-Sep-2012
3:16:58 PM

On 12/09/2012 One Day Hero wrote:
>I'm having trouble dealing with the concept of overgrading resulting in
>higher popularity.
Where'd you get that idea from?


The good Dr

12-Sep-2012
3:25:45 PM

On 12/09/2012 kieranl wrote:
>On 12/09/2012 One Day Hero wrote:
>>I'm having trouble dealing with the concept of overgrading resulting
>in
>>higher popularity.
>Where'd you get that idea from?

Damo devined it from the pattern of sludge in the bottom of Maccizza's unchanged bong water.


rodw

12-Sep-2012
3:46:16 PM

On 12/09/2012 Superstu wrote:
>All my new routes are graded 17 or 19 and get one star.... Regardless of
>their actual grade or quality, of which i have no idea (could be anywhere
>between 12 and 22)

I have only two grades 16 or 18..both do not reflect at all on any actual grade but just how I'm feeling on the day...odd numbers are a rookies mistake.

One Day Hero

12-Sep-2012
4:32:12 PM

On 12/09/2012 kieranl wrote:
>Where'd you get that idea from?

It's an observable phenomenon Kieran, adding grades and bolts to routes increases their desirability.


ajfclark

12-Sep-2012
4:36:07 PM

I've got to admit, I don't go around asking for the hardest route of a grade when I'm working into a new grade, just the opposite. If lots of people do this that'd mean the softer ticks would get more ascents.


Eduardo Slabofvic

12-Sep-2012
5:13:58 PM

On 12/09/2012 One Day Hero wrote:
>On 12/09/2012 kieranl wrote:
>>Where'd you get that idea from?
>
>It's an observable phenomenon Kieran, adding grades and bolts to routes
>increases their desirability.

Why else do so many people think Krabi is still a great place to climb

Wendy

12-Sep-2012
5:48:12 PM

I wanna be cranky like Damo!

I reckon the reason a lot of people think routes are really amazing are they make them feel good about their cilmbing. Hence why there are stars all over poxy little sport routes. I'll give you a good sport route is fun to climb, but I haven't done any where near as many 3 star sport routes as there seem to be around. It just takes a lot of amazingness to make 10m of climbing classic and 99.9% don't cut it (and I put Little Thor into this category to, so it's not just a trad bias).

In the end, a classic route is one you had in some way a fantastic and memorable experience on. Or you have enough capacity to put yourself in someone else's shoes, and realise that this pretty nice romp or desperate epic you have just done would be that for someone of the appropriate ability. I don't think it's even related to good moves, or even good rock. Good moves are totally subjective anyway. I find a lot of vertical face stuff pretty boring, whereas loads of people love it. I still think Five Fingered Mary is one of the classic routes at the Mt, and it's certainly not for rock quality! It's the overall experience of following such a big feature, battling with a bit of bodgy rock and undergrading, consistancy (in bodgy rock and undergrading too for that matter) and culminating in an awesome roof. There isn't another route like it at the Mt.

I've done plenty of other routes where bodgy rock really detracted from the experience. But then again, those complete pieces of choss at Barbican Wall were actually memorable and strangely great. Or at least for me. Douglas and Ben would probably say they were the worst routes they've done in the Gramps. Ok, so I have enough perspective to see they aren't 3 star ... but i am glad I did them, which is more than i can say for plenty of other routes. Ditto the ODH tour of overgrown and undergraded thrutchfests of Canberra granite he took me on. They were heaps of fun. I loved them.

And Neil - i love your post about taking local perspective! Just how did Nowra get any stars when compared to routes in the Blueys and Point Perp?

(Yes, I am having a dig, but it's kinda half serious - despite having a collection of not bad/maybe even pretty good routes, Nowra does have way too many stars if taken in that perspective)

One Day Hero

12-Sep-2012
6:38:02 PM

On 12/09/2012 Wendy wrote:
>I've done plenty of other routes where bodgy rock really detracted from
>the experience. But then again, those complete pieces of choss at Barbican
>Wall were actually memorable and strangely great. Or at least for me.

I've been trying to work out a systematic method for determining which choss is acceptable and which isn't........can't seem to pin it down. Some choss is amusing and cool, some is plain offensive, I don't know why.
>
>(Yes, I am having a dig, but it's kinda half serious - despite having
>a collection of not bad/maybe even pretty good routes, Nowra does have
>way too many stars if taken in that perspective)

Really? I think the Nowra classics could hold their heads up at almost any crag in the country.......you just need to go to Thommo's in good conditions and mid week, it's a great crag.

Despite all my hating on "New Nowra" and Wingello, I still feel that people should go and check things out for themselves. Once you're at the crag, Neil's whole "regional star system" is unnecessary. Just go there yourself and get on the best looking stuff. If the 3 star routes climb like crap, then its probably safe to assume that the whole crag is a pile of shit.

Wendy

12-Sep-2012
7:52:29 PM

Strangely enough, I've been to Thommo. Back in the mid 90s when it was probably much quieter. Quite a lot as I had that strange commuting thing going on that you get when you live in a big city (I lived in Sydney for a few years). What strikes me as interesting is I haven't been back since I left Sydney in 97. I have been to every other major climbing area in the country multiple times in the intervening 15 years. It might be distant memories, but surely that also means it can't be that great.

I remember doing the 3 star 20 at The Rock on a trip back to Sydney once. That was the sort of 3 star classic that makes you realise the crag is shît. You may have noticed me dissing the comparisons between The Rock and Arapiles before.

kieranl

12-Sep-2012
10:29:42 PM

On 12/09/2012 Wendy wrote:
>I wanna be cranky like Damo!
>
>I reckon the reason a lot of people think routes are really amazing are
>they make them feel good about their cilmbing. Hence why there are stars
>all over poxy little sport routes. I'll give you a good sport route is
>fun to climb, but I haven't done any where near as many 3 star sport routes
>as there seem to be around.
Yes, it's fairly telling that a lot of shorter sport routes generally get referred to be the grade rather than the name (20 on the left, 18 just right of that etc). People don't bother with the names because they're just a tick. It's not until you get to the really good ones, Terminal Insomnia for example, that the name is remembered.
Quality doesn't mean good rock or protection either. I think Guernica at Stapylton is quite good, it's a very attractive line but the rock is awful as is the gear but it's a great experience.


nmonteith

13-Sep-2012
8:59:03 AM

On 12/09/2012 Wendy wrote:
>Strangely enough, I've been to Thommo. Back in the mid 90s when it was
>probably much quieter. Quite a lot as I had that strange commuting thing
>going on that you get when you live in a big city (I lived in Sydney for
>a few years). What strikes me as interesting is I haven't been back since
>I left Sydney in 97. I have been to every other major climbing area in
>the country multiple times in the intervening 15 years. It might be distant
>memories, but surely that also means it can't be that great.

In the right conditions Nowra can be superb! There are plenty of routes of equal quality to Point Perp and The Bluies (but obviously without the exposure). Rock quality is certainly better than those two areas and the density of good varied routes makes it great. A place like Thomos has superb face, pockets, roofs, enduro and bouldery routes. All right next to each other. One winter you should head back up Wendy. You'd probably be pleasantly surprised. Not many roof off widths though.

There are 111 messages in this topic.