As I see it, here is the biggest problem with ratings correlations--especially between climbing routes and bouldering. I know and climb with people who have no problem doing sustained, rope length climbs of continuous 5.9 or 5.10 moves. Some of these people, however, can not execute a single V5 (5.12) move on a boulder. The converse also can be found. I know plenty of boulderers who can fire off a couple of V5 moves, but who would be swinging on the rope after 50 feet of pumpy, sustained 5.10 climbing on a route.

That is why the comparisons are a rough guide and (at best) will be pretty close for the aggregate of all climbers, even though a correlation may be pretty far off for an individual person, or when applied to an individual climb.

Regards,

Curt

ps. I also would like to add that I think the chart farther up this thread by "Offwidthclimber" is pretty accurate. It seems to be about the same as the conversion chart that I supplied John Sherman and appears in his book "Stone Crusade".

I've seen this mentioned several times before - references to a "first crux" and "second crux," and sometimes a "third crux" contained in a single route. If the crux is the single most critical or difficult move or section, then how can there be multiple cruxes (or cruces?)

Check out this link published by Rock and Ice Magazine:

http://www.rockandice.com/articles/how-to-climb/article/77-climbing-ratings-understanding-climbing-grades

Rating comparisons at the bottom.

Cheers,
Nelson

That chart is clearly off for the lower V-grades. V1 is, by definition, 5.10+ and it goes up from there. V2 is around 5.11 a/b, V3 is around 5.11 c/d and V4 is around 5.12a.

Curt

A ten year thread that has been resurrected, what, 4 times now? Amazing!