Forums: Climbing Information: Regional Discussions: Re: [petsfed] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts: Edit Log




sp115


Nov 28, 2011, 3:50 PM

Views: 8165

Registered: Apr 17, 2007
Posts: 515

Re: [petsfed] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  

petsfed wrote:
And I'm saying that there is no acceptable minimum grade for outdoor climbing that isn't ripped, potentially uncomfortably so, from the speaker's own ass.

I agree, a 5.4 sport route is probably a waste of bolts. That doesn't mean that they should be explicitly prohibited, either officially or by the community at large. If we just say "all routes must be 5.9 (for instance) to deserve bolts", then two things will happen: a lot of otherwise good (not great, or classic, but good) routes will get put up at 5.8 or under that are straight up death routes for anyone trying to break into that grade AND you'll see pretty serious grade creep as more 5.8, 5.7, even 5.6 routes get called 5.9 just to fit this arbitrary cutoff.

If you develop routes and are concerned about crowding, then don't develop a crag that will have that problem, at all. Don't put in the bolts for harder projects, don't put in the bolts for warmups. Don't develop the crag period.

You're arguing for a universe where climbers who can't onsite at a certain level don't count. My claim is that whatever the cutoff, it will be arbitrary, needlessly elitist, and counterproductive.

On behalf of all the fish in the barrel, I'm formally asking Johnwesely to put away his gun.


(This post was edited by sp115 on Nov 28, 2011, 3:52 PM)



Edit Log:
Post edited by sp115 () on Nov 28, 2011, 3:52 PM


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?