Forums: Climbing Information: Beginners: Re: [phoenixfire] Relative beginner at bouldering: Edit Log




ninepointeight


Jul 3, 2012, 8:16 AM

Views: 2217

Registered: May 14, 2012
Posts: 102

Re: [phoenixfire] Relative beginner at bouldering
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  

phoenixfire wrote:
Lastly, grades were originally intended to be exponential, not simply multiplicative...in other words, a V3 should be 4 times as hard as a V1 and 16 times harder than a V0. Many gyms have diluted grades and made them more of a step above each other instead of the original intent. So a V16 should be unimaginably harder than a V8...even though a V8 should be extremely difficult in its own right. Since I started bouldering around 1990, grades have changed completely and nowadays, they are getting softer and softer.


I don't know much about the history of bouldering or John 'Verm' Sherman but that doesn't make much sense. Grades will follow the law of diminishing returns because the performance of athletes does. The difference between a V1 and V2 should be far greater than the difference between V6 and V7. And the difference between V13 and 14 even smaller. Not the other way around.

OP - The hardest route at my gym is V9. There aren't that many people climbing that hard. Beyond V10 and your probably talking about a few hundred people climbing in the US who pull that hard.


(This post was edited by ninepointeight on Jul 3, 2012, 8:23 AM)



Edit Log:
Post edited by ninepointeight () on Jul 3, 2012, 8:18 AM
Post edited by ninepointeight () on Jul 3, 2012, 8:20 AM
Post edited by ninepointeight () on Jul 3, 2012, 8:23 AM


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$7.65 (10% off)
$15.26 (10% off)
$8.96 (10% off)
$107.96 (10% off)