Forums: Climbing Information: Technique & Training:
Smearing
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Technique & Training

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


gmggg


Mar 10, 2011, 11:42 AM
Post #26 of 60 (4580 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [camhead] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
gmggg wrote:
camhead wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
camhead wrote:
If you can't do a sequence using the holds provided, then either a) the setter sucks, or b) you need to get better. It's that simple.

Well I would disagree. How many times have you seen a group of people on a route outdoors climb a route the exact same way?

I never said anything about having to climb the route "exactly the same way." A good setter sets routes that might have a variety of different sequences to get through it. It's just that it's up to the setter, not some prefab, high texture surface that turns every route into a smear fest.

Just to be clear you are merely talking about actual smearing and not edging on some faux-rock features right?

Even the newer "smooth" wall style in contemporary gyms are smearable since they use some amount of texture paint. I've yet to see any gym (except old old gyms where the textures been worn away) that has walls that are too slick to smear.

The standard in most comps is that use of walls is good for feet, but not hands. And yeah, most surfaces will still allow you to smear on things like volumes, against opposing walls, occasionally hook around an arete. But for the most part (especially on steep stuff), this is quite a bit more challenging than smearing on high-texture entreprise-type surfaces.

Agreed that they generally are a much grippier texture.

It's kind of an interesting question because if indoor climbing is really "training" for outdoor there are equally good arguments for and against smearing.


mr.tastycakes


Mar 10, 2011, 11:48 AM
Post #27 of 60 (4578 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 10, 2008
Posts: 310

Re: [camhead] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
you will become a better, stronger climber by sticking to sequence, not by "outsmarting" the route.

+1. I don't smear on features unless that was the setter's intention, i.e. routes marked "features on" or "arete/corner on." My goal in the gym is to become a better, more fit climber, not to find a way around the intended sequences via some outlandish smearing, hipscumming, arete-hooking beta. There's a grey area here, of course.

I get the feeling from reading through this thread that some posters are not differentiating smearing and flagging.


gmggg


Mar 10, 2011, 11:56 AM
Post #28 of 60 (4567 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [mr.tastycakes] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mr.tastycakes wrote:
camhead wrote:
you will become a better, stronger climber by sticking to sequence, not by "outsmarting" the route.

+1. I don't smear on features unless that was the setter's intention, i.e. routes marked "features on" or "arete/corner on." My goal in the gym is to become a better, more fit climber, not to find a way around the intended sequences via some outlandish smearing, hipscumming, arete-hooking beta. There's a grey area here, of course.

I get the feeling from reading through this thread that some posters are not differentiating smearing and flagging.

If the setter clearly marks his intentions then the whole case is moot.

If you're really training for outdoor climbing couldn't some part of that training include solid footwork and route-reading skills that resulted in smearing and beta breaking.


mr.tastycakes


Mar 10, 2011, 12:28 PM
Post #29 of 60 (4550 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 10, 2008
Posts: 310

Re: [gmggg] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

gmggg wrote:
mr.tastycakes wrote:
camhead wrote:
you will become a better, stronger climber by sticking to sequence, not by "outsmarting" the route.

+1. I don't smear on features unless that was the setter's intention, i.e. routes marked "features on" or "arete/corner on." My goal in the gym is to become a better, more fit climber, not to find a way around the intended sequences via some outlandish smearing, hipscumming, arete-hooking beta. There's a grey area here, of course.

I get the feeling from reading through this thread that some posters are not differentiating smearing and flagging.

If the setter clearly marks his intentions then the whole case is moot.

If you're really training for outdoor climbing couldn't some part of that training include solid footwork and route-reading skills that resulted in smearing and beta breaking.

Well, I agree that finding a way around the intended sequence(s) is, at least, a good exercise in developing creative beta.


ceebo


Mar 10, 2011, 1:32 PM
Post #30 of 60 (4530 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [jbro_135] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jbro_135 wrote:
ceebo wrote:
It seems to me that smearing is mostly used when the climber has no answer to a move, even though their is. The more experienced climbers appear to use it allot less, when it is the only or most efficient option.

The times i personally use this move is on the extreme high steps where leaning off to bring the foot up is either too demanding or not possible. Sometimes its better to just crimp > crunch up and power your way through the move with a smear instead.

I would say its better to smear as little as possible as a new climber. Its quite easy to learn and it is equally easy to use on lower end grades. Its just to easy to assume any move that you can not think a way around ''must'' be a smear.. when mostly it will not be.

It could be that where you climb forces the use of lots of smears. I personaly think thats lame.. because its to easy to learn and you could be spending time learning more advanced things.


You have no idea what you're talking about, and you obviously have terrible footwork from what you just described

You are telling me that between 0-v8, you have never used a lay back on a high step before rocking on?. Interesting routes you climb, or are you 6 foot +?.

Since your so certain i fail lets put my personal climbing ability aside.

I have set countless routes between f4-8. Allot of the more experienced climbers complete/attempt my sequences in the intended way. However i noticed that around the 4-6 area their is allot more variation in the styles people complete moves, smearing being one. But it is certainly not the intended primary solution. Since it is the only alternative they know then clearly it is most efficient for them, but compared to what?.

I would appreciate your theory on the effects of bypassing a intended move with a smear. Or, for that matter i would like your thoughts on bypassing any move with an alternative learned sequence that ignores the intended solution. Yes height can be a dictation in cases, but put those situations aside.

Do you think such people are trying to train?, and doing themselves justice on that matter?. Can they be gifted enough to know that their solution is most efficient before learning or completing the intended solution? and even if not.. does that mean learning the new sequence has no baring on the future?.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Mar 10, 2011, 1:38 PM)


jt512


Mar 10, 2011, 1:59 PM
Post #31 of 60 (4510 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [mr.tastycakes] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mr.tastycakes wrote:
camhead wrote:
you will become a better, stronger climber by sticking to sequence, not by "outsmarting" the route.

+1. I don't smear on features unless that was the setter's intention, i.e. routes marked "features on" or "arete/corner on." My goal in the gym is to become a better, more fit climber, not to find a way around the intended sequences via some outlandish smearing, hipscumming, arete-hooking beta. There's a grey area here, of course.

I get the feeling from reading through this thread that some posters are not differentiating smearing and flagging.

I get the feeling you're not differentiating between smearing and using features.

Jay


jt512


Mar 10, 2011, 2:00 PM
Post #32 of 60 (4509 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [mr.tastycakes] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mr.tastycakes wrote:
gmggg wrote:
mr.tastycakes wrote:
camhead wrote:
you will become a better, stronger climber by sticking to sequence, not by "outsmarting" the route.

+1. I don't smear on features unless that was the setter's intention, i.e. routes marked "features on" or "arete/corner on." My goal in the gym is to become a better, more fit climber, not to find a way around the intended sequences via some outlandish smearing, hipscumming, arete-hooking beta. There's a grey area here, of course.

I get the feeling from reading through this thread that some posters are not differentiating smearing and flagging.

If the setter clearly marks his intentions then the whole case is moot.

If you're really training for outdoor climbing couldn't some part of that training include solid footwork and route-reading skills that resulted in smearing and beta breaking.

Well, I agree that finding a way around the intended sequence(s) is, at least, a good exercise in developing creative beta.

Or, in my case, stealing it.

Jay


gosharks


Mar 10, 2011, 2:06 PM
Post #33 of 60 (4507 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 6, 2004
Posts: 268

Re: [ceebo] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
It seems to me that smearing is mostly used when the climber has no answer to a move, even though their is. The more experienced climbers appear to use it allot less, when it is the only or most efficient option.

The times i personally use this move is on the extreme high steps where leaning off to bring the foot up is either too demanding or not possible. Sometimes its better to just crimp > crunch up and power your way through the move with a smear instead.

I would say its better to smear as little as possible as a new climber. Its quite easy to learn and it is equally easy to use on lower end grades. Its just to easy to assume any move that you can not think a way around ''must'' be a smear.. when mostly it will not be.

It could be that where you climb forces the use of lots of smears. I personaly think thats lame.. because its to easy to learn and you could be spending time learning more advanced things.
Smearing is a regular occurrence for me, but I do smear more on easy climbs than I do on hard climbs.


gosharks


Mar 10, 2011, 2:08 PM
Post #34 of 60 (4507 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 6, 2004
Posts: 268

Re: [ceebo] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
You are telling me that between 0-v8, you have never used a lay back on a high step before rocking on?. Interesting routes you climb, or are you 6 foot +?.

Since your so certain i fail lets put my personal climbing ability aside.

I have set countless routes between f4-8. Allot of the more experienced climbers complete/attempt my sequences in the intended way. However i noticed that around the 4-6 area their is allot more variation in the styles people complete moves, smearing being one. But it is certainly not the intended primary solution. Since it is the only alternative they know then clearly it is most efficient for them, but compared to what?.

I would appreciate your theory on the effects of bypassing a intended move with a smear. Or, for that matter i would like your thoughts on bypassing any move with an alternative learned sequence that ignores the intended solution. Yes height can be a dictation in cases, but put those situations aside.

Do you think such people are trying to train?, and doing themselves justice on that matter?. Can they be gifted enough to know that their solution is most efficient before learning or completing the intended solution? and even if not.. does that mean learning the new sequence has no baring on the future?.
Have you considered that the variation in smearing amounts is caused by your setting style that perhaps opens up different sequences because you are setting easier?


bearbreeder


Mar 10, 2011, 2:18 PM
Post #35 of 60 (4499 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [ErnestC3] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

no reason not to do it if yr training for outdoors

outside, i can smear on anything ... but then i climb on nice squamish granite ...


ceebo


Mar 10, 2011, 6:13 PM
Post #36 of 60 (4473 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [gosharks] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

gosharks wrote:
ceebo wrote:
You are telling me that between 0-v8, you have never used a lay back on a high step before rocking on?. Interesting routes you climb, or are you 6 foot +?.

Since your so certain i fail lets put my personal climbing ability aside.

I have set countless routes between f4-8. Allot of the more experienced climbers complete/attempt my sequences in the intended way. However i noticed that around the 4-6 area their is allot more variation in the styles people complete moves, smearing being one. But it is certainly not the intended primary solution. Since it is the only alternative they know then clearly it is most efficient for them, but compared to what?.

I would appreciate your theory on the effects of bypassing a intended move with a smear. Or, for that matter i would like your thoughts on bypassing any move with an alternative learned sequence that ignores the intended solution. Yes height can be a dictation in cases, but put those situations aside.

Do you think such people are trying to train?, and doing themselves justice on that matter?. Can they be gifted enough to know that their solution is most efficient before learning or completing the intended solution? and even if not.. does that mean learning the new sequence has no baring on the future?.
Have you considered that the variation in smearing amounts is caused by your setting style that perhaps opens up different sequences because you are setting easier?

Yes i have. And that is why i spent hour after hour trying to create a route that had the potential to cover all the basics, while remaining a 4.. so that after spending some time on that route they could better understand the moves on ''normal'' routes. 0's being the holds the below pattern is eventually what i came up with.

The centre 0's at least force you to share hands, feet if desired. I'm sure you can spot the rest of the potential for lower body positions.

---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
------0
0------
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------


jt512


Mar 10, 2011, 6:26 PM
Post #37 of 60 (4462 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [ceebo] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
gosharks wrote:
ceebo wrote:
You are telling me that between 0-v8, you have never used a lay back on a high step before rocking on?. Interesting routes you climb, or are you 6 foot +?.

Since your so certain i fail lets put my personal climbing ability aside.

I have set countless routes between f4-8. Allot of the more experienced climbers complete/attempt my sequences in the intended way. However i noticed that around the 4-6 area their is allot more variation in the styles people complete moves, smearing being one. But it is certainly not the intended primary solution. Since it is the only alternative they know then clearly it is most efficient for them, but compared to what?.

I would appreciate your theory on the effects of bypassing a intended move with a smear. Or, for that matter i would like your thoughts on bypassing any move with an alternative learned sequence that ignores the intended solution. Yes height can be a dictation in cases, but put those situations aside.

Do you think such people are trying to train?, and doing themselves justice on that matter?. Can they be gifted enough to know that their solution is most efficient before learning or completing the intended solution? and even if not.. does that mean learning the new sequence has no baring on the future?.
Have you considered that the variation in smearing amounts is caused by your setting style that perhaps opens up different sequences because you are setting easier?

Yes i have. And that is why i spent hour after hour trying to create a route that had the potential to cover all the basics, while remaining a 4.. so that after spending some time on that route they could better understand the moves on ''normal'' routes. 0's being the holds the below pattern is eventually what i came up with.

The centre 0's at least force you to share hands, feet if desired. I'm sure you can spot the rest of the potential for lower body positions.

---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
------0
0------
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------

Now it all makes sense.

Jay


jbro_135


Mar 10, 2011, 7:29 PM
Post #38 of 60 (4447 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2009
Posts: 662

Re: [jt512] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
ceebo wrote:
gosharks wrote:
ceebo wrote:
You are telling me that between 0-v8, you have never used a lay back on a high step before rocking on?. Interesting routes you climb, or are you 6 foot +?.

Since your so certain i fail lets put my personal climbing ability aside.

I have set countless routes between f4-8. Allot of the more experienced climbers complete/attempt my sequences in the intended way. However i noticed that around the 4-6 area their is allot more variation in the styles people complete moves, smearing being one. But it is certainly not the intended primary solution. Since it is the only alternative they know then clearly it is most efficient for them, but compared to what?.

I would appreciate your theory on the effects of bypassing a intended move with a smear. Or, for that matter i would like your thoughts on bypassing any move with an alternative learned sequence that ignores the intended solution. Yes height can be a dictation in cases, but put those situations aside.

Do you think such people are trying to train?, and doing themselves justice on that matter?. Can they be gifted enough to know that their solution is most efficient before learning or completing the intended solution? and even if not.. does that mean learning the new sequence has no baring on the future?.
Have you considered that the variation in smearing amounts is caused by your setting style that perhaps opens up different sequences because you are setting easier?

Yes i have. And that is why i spent hour after hour trying to create a route that had the potential to cover all the basics, while remaining a 4.. so that after spending some time on that route they could better understand the moves on ''normal'' routes. 0's being the holds the below pattern is eventually what i came up with.

The centre 0's at least force you to share hands, feet if desired. I'm sure you can spot the rest of the potential for lower body positions.

---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
------0
0------
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------

Now it all makes sense.

Jay

All I can picture from Ceebo's description of smearing is some musclebound dude at a birthday party highstepping with his right foot and desperately flailing with the left as he tries to haul himself up a slightly overhanging 5.7.


ensonik


Mar 10, 2011, 7:45 PM
Post #39 of 60 (4440 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 14, 2009
Posts: 134

Re: [jbro_135] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jbro_135 wrote:
ceebo wrote:

---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
------0
0------
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------

All I can picture from Ceebo's description of smearing is some musclebound dude at a birthday party highstepping with his right foot and desperately flailing with the left as he tries to haul himself up a slightly overhanging 5.7.

That or he's just figured out through other means the opening chord to A Hard Day's Night (... yup, so obscur is this joke, that it needs explaining)


shockabuku


Mar 10, 2011, 8:03 PM
Post #40 of 60 (4432 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868

Re: [ceebo] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
It seems to me that smearing is mostly used when the climber has no answer to a move, even though their is. The more experienced climbers appear to use it allot less, when it is the only or most efficient option.

The times i personally use this move is on the extreme high steps where leaning off to bring the foot up is either too demanding or not possible. Sometimes its better to just crimp > crunch up and power your way through the move with a smear instead.

I would say its better to smear as little as possible as a new climber. Its quite easy to learn and it is equally easy to use on lower end grades. Its just to easy to assume any move that you can not think a way around ''must'' be a smear.. when mostly it will not be.

It could be that where you climb forces the use of lots of smears. I personaly think thats lame.. because its to easy to learn and you could be spending time learning more advanced things.

How do you power up on a crimp and a smear where a high step is intended? I can't quite picture this. If I was using a smear part way to a high step I think the smear would be pretty much in front of my body. That would push my ass out and pop me off of a crimp.


jt512


Mar 10, 2011, 8:21 PM
Post #41 of 60 (4429 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [shockabuku] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

shockabuku wrote:
ceebo wrote:
It seems to me that smearing is mostly used when the climber has no answer to a move, even though their is. The more experienced climbers appear to use it allot less, when it is the only or most efficient option.

The times i personally use this move is on the extreme high steps where leaning off to bring the foot up is either too demanding or not possible. Sometimes its better to just crimp > crunch up and power your way through the move with a smear instead.

I would say its better to smear as little as possible as a new climber. Its quite easy to learn and it is equally easy to use on lower end grades. Its just to easy to assume any move that you can not think a way around ''must'' be a smear.. when mostly it will not be.

It could be that where you climb forces the use of lots of smears. I personaly think thats lame.. because its to easy to learn and you could be spending time learning more advanced things.

How do you power up on a crimp and a smear where a high step is intended? I can't quite picture this. If I was using a smear part way to a high step I think the smear would be pretty much in front of my body. That would push my ass out and pop me off of a crimp.

Dude, check the diagram!

Jay


shockabuku


Mar 10, 2011, 8:41 PM
Post #42 of 60 (4411 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868

Re: [jt512] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
ceebo wrote:
It seems to me that smearing is mostly used when the climber has no answer to a move, even though their is. The more experienced climbers appear to use it allot less, when it is the only or most efficient option.

The times i personally use this move is on the extreme high steps where leaning off to bring the foot up is either too demanding or not possible. Sometimes its better to just crimp > crunch up and power your way through the move with a smear instead.

I would say its better to smear as little as possible as a new climber. Its quite easy to learn and it is equally easy to use on lower end grades. Its just to easy to assume any move that you can not think a way around ''must'' be a smear.. when mostly it will not be.

It could be that where you climb forces the use of lots of smears. I personaly think thats lame.. because its to easy to learn and you could be spending time learning more advanced things.

How do you power up on a crimp and a smear where a high step is intended? I can't quite picture this. If I was using a smear part way to a high step I think the smear would be pretty much in front of my body. That would push my ass out and pop me off of a crimp.

Dude, check the diagram!

Jay

Let's see...


---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
------0
0------
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------

I can envision something like ceebo describes occurring on a problem set like this. The learning point still continues to escape me however.Frown


ceebo


Mar 11, 2011, 4:09 AM
Post #43 of 60 (4372 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [shockabuku] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

shockabuku wrote:
ceebo wrote:
It seems to me that smearing is mostly used when the climber has no answer to a move, even though their is. The more experienced climbers appear to use it allot less, when it is the only or most efficient option.

The times i personally use this move is on the extreme high steps where leaning off to bring the foot up is either too demanding or not possible. Sometimes its better to just crimp > crunch up and power your way through the move with a smear instead.

I would say its better to smear as little as possible as a new climber. Its quite easy to learn and it is equally easy to use on lower end grades. Its just to easy to assume any move that you can not think a way around ''must'' be a smear.. when mostly it will not be.

It could be that where you climb forces the use of lots of smears. I personaly think thats lame.. because its to easy to learn and you could be spending time learning more advanced things.

How do you power up on a crimp and a smear where a high step is intended? I can't quite picture this. If I was using a smear part way to a high step I think the smear would be pretty much in front of my body. That would push my ass out and pop me off of a crimp.

Yeah i see what you mean, but thats not the move i meant.

From the left foot hold, the foot would then go slightly out to the left of that hold and around 10-15 inches up the wall (or so). The toes of the left foot would point to around the 11 o clock posistion. Then the trunk would lean and follow into that position (maybe slightly more horizontal) and the left knee would bend over the foot to keep arse in. That would result in the right arm extending more keeping the crimp friction and also forcing more wieght onto the left foot to keep smear friction, the left arm is most likely at full lock by this point. You would gain that extra height to bring the right foot high step into reach.

If somebody can tell me what the left leg is forced to do if the left hand is the next move, i will never post again.


ceebo


Mar 11, 2011, 4:33 AM
Post #44 of 60 (4365 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [shockabuku] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

shockabuku wrote:
jt512 wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
ceebo wrote:
It seems to me that smearing is mostly used when the climber has no answer to a move, even though their is. The more experienced climbers appear to use it allot less, when it is the only or most efficient option.

The times i personally use this move is on the extreme high steps where leaning off to bring the foot up is either too demanding or not possible. Sometimes its better to just crimp > crunch up and power your way through the move with a smear instead.

I would say its better to smear as little as possible as a new climber. Its quite easy to learn and it is equally easy to use on lower end grades. Its just to easy to assume any move that you can not think a way around ''must'' be a smear.. when mostly it will not be.

It could be that where you climb forces the use of lots of smears. I personaly think thats lame.. because its to easy to learn and you could be spending time learning more advanced things.

How do you power up on a crimp and a smear where a high step is intended? I can't quite picture this. If I was using a smear part way to a high step I think the smear would be pretty much in front of my body. That would push my ass out and pop me off of a crimp.

Dude, check the diagram!

Jay

Let's see...


---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
------0
0------
-------
-------
---0---
-------
-------
0------
------0
-------
-------
---0---
-------

I can envision something like ceebo describes occurring on a problem set like this. The learning point still continues to escape me however.Frown

The centre holds are well within reach tip to toe even for children. But that makes no differance i guess. Nothing can be trained here.

Ofc jay once again proves he has a strong hate for those who strive to help others.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Mar 11, 2011, 5:20 AM)


Partner j_ung


Mar 11, 2011, 6:04 AM
Post #45 of 60 (4350 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690

Re: [camhead] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
For the purposes of indoor climbing, here is my take: Smearing is really easy on Nicros and Entreprise walls (as mentioned earlier) because they are so heavily textured. I've actually had a hard time setting on walls like that, because the textures and diverse features give you too many options.

More recently, walls have been moving toward having no texture at all, with just paint or varnished plywood for a surface. This makes it harder (if not impossible) to smear, and ultimately gives the route-setter more autonomy in setting feet only where they are needed. Active sequence prevails, rather than passive features.

If you have a shitty route setter, smearing sometimes can be a way of still having an enjoyable time on otherwise lame routes. Fortunately, the facilities most likely to have shitty setters are also those most likely to have heavily featured, textured, and less steep walls (most university walls).

Good gyms with good route setters should neither have nor need smears. And, assuming that you already have basic 10a slab technique, you will become a better, stronger climber by sticking to sequence, not by "outsmarting" the route.

If you can't do a sequence using the holds provided, then either a) the setter sucks, or b) you need to get better. It's that simple.

I normally don't disagree with you, at least not rabidly. But in this case, you're stark-raving fool. And CI is a bleeping genius. Tongue


Partner j_ung


Mar 11, 2011, 6:07 AM
Post #46 of 60 (4347 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690

Re: [ceebo] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
...i spent hour after hour trying to create a route that had the potential to cover all the basics, while remaining a 4...

When I managed a gym, spending hour after hour on any one route would have earned a good finger wagging. Laugh

edit: what does "f4-8" mean?


(This post was edited by j_ung on Mar 11, 2011, 6:07 AM)


gmggg


Mar 11, 2011, 6:25 AM
Post #47 of 60 (4337 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [ceebo] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
ceebo wrote:
It seems to me that smearing is mostly used when the climber has no answer to a move, even though their is. The more experienced climbers appear to use it allot less, when it is the only or most efficient option.

The times i personally use this move is on the extreme high steps where leaning off to bring the foot up is either too demanding or not possible. Sometimes its better to just crimp > crunch up and power your way through the move with a smear instead.

I would say its better to smear as little as possible as a new climber. Its quite easy to learn and it is equally easy to use on lower end grades. Its just to easy to assume any move that you can not think a way around ''must'' be a smear.. when mostly it will not be.

It could be that where you climb forces the use of lots of smears. I personaly think thats lame.. because its to easy to learn and you could be spending time learning more advanced things.

How do you power up on a crimp and a smear where a high step is intended? I can't quite picture this. If I was using a smear part way to a high step I think the smear would be pretty much in front of my body. That would push my ass out and pop me off of a crimp.

Yeah i see what you mean, but thats not the move i meant.

From the left foot hold, the foot would then go slightly out to the left of that hold and around 10-15 inches up the wall (or so). The toes of the left foot would point to around the 11 o clock posistion. Then the trunk would lean and follow into that position (maybe slightly more horizontal) and the left knee would bend over the foot to keep arse in. That would result in the right arm extending more keeping the crimp friction and also forcing more wieght onto the left foot to keep smear friction, the left arm is most likely at full lock by this point. You would gain that extra height to bring the right foot high step into reach.

If somebody can tell me what the left leg is forced to do if the left hand is the next move, i will never post again.

Well, given your diagram, I guess the left leg will just move to the next highest hold on the ladder.

Don't bother posting and telling me I'm right - I'm holding out for you to keep your promise.


gmggg


Mar 11, 2011, 6:41 AM
Post #48 of 60 (4330 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [j_ung] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
ceebo wrote:
...i spent hour after hour trying to create a route that had the potential to cover all the basics, while remaining a 4...

When I managed a gym, spending hour after hour on any one route would have earned a good finger wagging. Laugh

edit: what does "f4-8" mean?

It means that his fingers are too fat to select the correct key in the d-f-c-v group.


Partner camhead


Mar 11, 2011, 6:46 AM
Post #49 of 60 (4325 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20939

Re: [j_ung] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
camhead wrote:
For the purposes of indoor climbing, here is my take: Smearing is really easy on Nicros and Entreprise walls (as mentioned earlier) because they are so heavily textured. I've actually had a hard time setting on walls like that, because the textures and diverse features give you too many options.

More recently, walls have been moving toward having no texture at all, with just paint or varnished plywood for a surface. This makes it harder (if not impossible) to smear, and ultimately gives the route-setter more autonomy in setting feet only where they are needed. Active sequence prevails, rather than passive features.

If you have a shitty route setter, smearing sometimes can be a way of still having an enjoyable time on otherwise lame routes. Fortunately, the facilities most likely to have shitty setters are also those most likely to have heavily featured, textured, and less steep walls (most university walls).

Good gyms with good route setters should neither have nor need smears. And, assuming that you already have basic 10a slab technique, you will become a better, stronger climber by sticking to sequence, not by "outsmarting" the route.

If you can't do a sequence using the holds provided, then either a) the setter sucks, or b) you need to get better. It's that simple.

I normally don't disagree with you, at least not rabidly. But in this case, you're stark-raving fool. And CI is a bleeping genius. Tongue

Oh yeah? I'm wrong? Come and say it to my FACE internet tough guy! (preferably over beers and sandstone in the next month or so)Smile


ceebo


Mar 11, 2011, 6:48 AM
Post #50 of 60 (4325 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [gmggg] Smearing [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

The diagram has nothing to do with the move i described, and certainly does not need any sort of smearing to complete any of the various moves. The move was disputed in the first post i made.. and the diagram was posted for a different question somebody asked.

Although i can see why you got confused.

I will amuse with another diagram of the kind of move i had in mind.


-----0---
----------
-------0--
----------
--0-------
----------
----------
------0---
-----------
-----------
-----------
-----0-----
----------0


(This post was edited by ceebo on Mar 11, 2011, 7:09 AM)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : Technique & Training

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$53.96 (10% off)
$40.46 (10% off)
$49.46 (10% off)
$125.96 (10% off)



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook