|
outsideguyzak
Nov 16, 2005, 7:54 PM
Post #1 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2005
Posts: 169
|
I have read and have been told that you should be projecting climbs that are one number grade higher than your best onsight...
Does anyone have any comments on this, or any experience that verifies it?
Are your onsights about one number grade less than your projects??
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Nov 16, 2005, 8:03 PM
Post #2 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
its not that you should, but you should be able to RP routes that are 2-3yosemite grades higher than you OS.
|
|
|
|
|
the_soph
Nov 16, 2005, 8:05 PM
Post #3 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2005
Posts: 24
|
projects should be challenging - that's the only real qualification. it could be grades below what you onsite, as long as it requires something new and more difficult than what you're used to. for example, someone who climbs mostly slab could make a project out of an overhanging problem that's rated below their onsighting level on slab.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 16, 2005, 8:13 PM
Post #4 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: I have read and have been told that you should be projecting climbs that are one number grade higher than your best onsight...
You should be able to redpoint a route one (YDS) number grade harder than your best onsight. Whether you "should" do this, or not, is debatable.
In reply to: Does anyone have any comments on this, or any experience that verifies it?
My best redpoint is exactly one number grade harder than my best onsight.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 16, 2005, 8:36 PM
Post #5 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
Beware of statistical averages whether they are about onsight vs redpoint, wingspan vs height, pulse rate or life expectency. They are exactly that -AVERAGES. It's nice if you fit the norm but there is a lot of deviation.
In this context (onsite vs redpoint) the 1 full number grade rule approximates the results for a lot of people. But if you fall more towards the endurance end of the power <-> endurance scale you can probably on-site closer to your absolute redpoint limit. If you have power in spades - for about 10 seconds - then you may hardly on-sight anything.
Personally I have no power but decent endurance and my best onsight is only about 1 letter worse then my best redpoint. I typically have the sense that if I don't get or am fairly close to getting, a route the first time (provided I am warmed up but not tired - in other words that everything is "right") then i am not going to be able to do it ever.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 16, 2005, 8:45 PM
Post #6 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: I typically have the sense that if I don't get or am fairly close to getting, a route the first time (provided I am warmed up but not tired - in other words that everything is "right") then i am not going to be able to do it ever.
Sounds like more of a belief than anything. What you are saying would only be true if you climbed the route as best as you possibly could the first time, which is amost certainly not true. With repeated efforts, your effiicency on the climb improves, allowing you to redpoint at a considerably harder level than you onsight, no matter how good your endurance is.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
reg
Nov 16, 2005, 8:55 PM
Post #7 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1560
|
in other words: train harder then you want to climb. wanna do 10's - then fall off a lot of 11's.
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Nov 16, 2005, 9:50 PM
Post #8 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
I wouldn't get too caught up in ratings. Ratings depend a lot about what you are good at and they vary from place to place. Most of my redpoint projects are the same or a letter grade higher than my best onsight. However, most of my redpoints are "classic" Yosemite climbs. In other words, they tend to be more sustained at the grade than my typical onsights.
A better way to look at would be how many attempts/how much time it takes to do your redpoints. If you are spending more than about ten days on all of your redpoints, that is probably too much. Occasionally it might be worth it to really spend a long time on one climb (and if you have redpointed everything else in your local area and stuck with the really hard ones you might not have a choice).
It depends also what you are training for. If you want to be able to get up long multi-pitch, work on onsights and short redpoints. If your only goal is redpointing really hard sport, working longer on redpoints makes more sense.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 16, 2005, 9:56 PM
Post #9 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
In reply to: In reply to: I typically have the sense that if I don't get or am fairly close to getting, a route the first time (provided I am warmed up but not tired - in other words that everything is "right") then i am not going to be able to do it ever. Sounds like more of a belief than anything. What you are saying would only be true if you climbed the route as best as you possibly could the first time, which is amost certainly not true. With repeated efforts, your effiicency on the climb improves, allowing you to redpoint at a considerably harder level than you onsight, no matter how good your endurance is. Jay
That's the typical party line and it is somewhat true. If a route has a tricky, inobvious sequence then it is more the case. but if the route is fairly straight forward I am usually pretty good about reading it and making an all out effort the first time. I have been plateaued (sp?) for about 15 years (and at my age just maintaining is equivalent to improving) - best on-sight = 12a, best redpoint = 12b, 12c = never/ever -year after year after year. Now the party line will say that I am in rut and need some variety in my training and approach - but the truth is that I have read all the sacred climbing training books and have tried a variety of approaches, Doesn't matter, the results are the same. I think in my case it seems from a genetic lack of power. You can train endurance to a much greater degree then power. I suppose that if I could devote my life completely to climbing I could improve a bit but I think the delta between my on-sight and redpoint levels would still be relatively small.
|
|
|
|
|
paganmonkeyboy
Nov 16, 2005, 10:27 PM
Post #10 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 30, 2003
Posts: 663
|
In reply to: Beware of statistical averages whether they are about onsight vs redpoint, wingspan vs height, pulse rate or life expectency. They are exactly that -AVERAGES. It's nice if you fit the norm but there is a lot of deviation.
most people have more than the average number of legs per person, statistically...
but statistics can be used to prove anything you want to - 16% of all people know that...
|
|
|
|
|
outsideguyzak
Nov 16, 2005, 10:29 PM
Post #11 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2005
Posts: 169
|
i don't plan on projecting any climbs anytime soon, i was mostly just curious as to other people's experiences. i have more fun getting on routes that i can either onsite, or get within a couple more tries.
|
|
|
|
|
arnoilgner
Nov 16, 2005, 10:35 PM
Post #12 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2003
Posts: 366
|
Hello outsideguyzak,
My redpoint level is about a full number grade above my on-sight grade. But this is just what it is for me. Basically, you'll be able to redpoint somewhat harder than you can on-sight.
Pay attention to:
*How close is your on-sight to redpoint grade. If it is close, like 11a/11b respectively, then you probably aren't spending much time on redpoints. So, deliberately work routes more and then redpoint them.
*If your redpoint grade is way higher than your on-sight grade then you aren't practicing on-sights enough. So, go to routes with the intention of on-sighting.
Of course it all depends on what you want to get out of climbing. But, you will become a much more well rounded climber if you can on-sight and redpoint well...
arno
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 17, 2005, 1:02 AM
Post #13 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: I typically have the sense that if I don't get or am fairly close to getting, a route the first time (provided I am warmed up but not tired - in other words that everything is "right") then i am not going to be able to do it ever. Sounds like more of a belief than anything. What you are saying would only be true if you climbed the route as best as you possibly could the first time, which is amost certainly not true. With repeated efforts, your effiicency on the climb improves, allowing you to redpoint at a considerably harder level than you onsight, no matter how good your endurance is. Jay That's the typical party line and it is somewhat true. If a route has a tricky, inobvious sequence then it is more the case. but if the route is fairly straight forward I am usually pretty good about reading it and making an all out effort the first time.
You might be making the right moves, but are you executing each one of them as well as you possibly can, using the best possible balance, timing, pacing, and so on. I find it hard to believe that there is no room for improvement in your technique.
In reply to: I have been plateaued (sp?) for about 15 years (and at my age just maintaining is equivalent to improving) - best on-sight = 12a, best redpoint = 12b, 12c = never/ever -year after year after year. Now the party line will say that I am in rut and need some variety in my training and approach - but the truth is that I have read all the sacred climbing training books and have tried a variety of approaches, Doesn't matter, the results are the same. I think in my case it seems from a genetic lack of power. You can train endurance to a much greater degree then power.
There is reason to believe that the current training paradigm, which emphasizes a dichotomy between strength and technique, and therefore implies that climbing strength can be significantly improved by non-climbing training, is fundamentally wrong. The book The Self-Coached Climber by Hague and Hunter, which introduces a new, more kinesiologically based training approach, emphasizing movement quality and highly climbing-specific fitness exercises, will be published in January. You may find that by using this radical approach to training that you can break through your plateau. The book has been reviewed by j_ung here.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
outsideguyzak
Nov 17, 2005, 6:50 AM
Post #14 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2005
Posts: 169
|
well, i don't ever spend much time trying to redpoint routes. If it doesn't go in the first two or three tries, i decide to keep climbing a lot and training some, and come back to it later. that is why my highest onsight is only one letter grade from my highest redpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
grovehunter
Nov 17, 2005, 7:26 AM
Post #15 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 29, 2005
Posts: 227
|
I'm starting to wonder about all these grades myself. What if you just want to climb and have fun and meet new people. Don't get me wrong I want to improve, I'm working on everything I can right now. I guess after ten years of not climbing and a year and a half in a shoulder sling, I'm happy just to feel the rock again! In my past, the highest grade I climbed was - 5.10. I've almost reached that limit with a few months at the gym and a couple trips to J-Tree. Hell, I cleaned a 5.9 route my first day back outdoors. If they didn't tell me afterward I may never have known....
Peace,
GH
|
|
|
|
|
_fiend_
Nov 17, 2005, 11:15 AM
Post #16 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 3, 2005
Posts: 104
|
I read that it's considered standard that most people could redpoint 2 full (i.e. not pluses) French grades above their onsight limit. Which amazingly enough corresponds to 1 full number grade in US money :wink: (And as an aside, roughly corresponds to 2 full adjectival grades in the UK - which is considered to be the standard headpoint / onsight grade difference).
Seems quite a way to me (I never redpoint), but then again if you are working things properly I can imagine it's feasible.
P.S....
In reply to: I have been plateaued (sp?) for about 15 years (and at my age just maintaining is equivalent to improving) - best on-sight = 12a, best redpoint = 12b, 12c = never/ever -year after year after year.
Maybe you are just bloody awesome at onsighting right near your limit, getting sequences right first time etc etc :wink: I.e. your redpoint grade isn't too low, it's your onsighting grade that's too high :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
daithi
Nov 17, 2005, 11:49 AM
Post #17 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2005
Posts: 397
|
If onsighting is your style of climbing you can get close to within 2 French grades (we normally include the plus when counting), i.e. redpoint 7c onsight 7b. That's 2 letter grades YDS. If you project routes for a long time then maybe it is conceivable for 4 French grades, 1 number grade YDS, to be the difference. This does seem quite a discrepancy though! It means a climber who could onsight 7b could redpoint 8a!
|
|
|
|
|
arnoilgner
Nov 18, 2005, 3:03 PM
Post #18 of 18
(9053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2003
Posts: 366
|
Hi grovehunter,
Your comment below:
"I'm starting to wonder about all these grades myself. What if you just want to climb and have fun and meet new people. Don't get me wrong I want to improve"
Having fun and meeting new people is great but in some aspect of our life we need to be challenged. Climbing may not be that for you if you just want to have fun. We do feel empowered and like we know ourselves better when we meet fear and challenge and work through it. Without this aspect in some part of our life we stagnate.
arno
|
|
|
|
|
|
