|
dingus
Dec 1, 2007, 1:11 AM
Post #101 of 241
(10535 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Pretty funny how it does that mobius strip thing, from YDS to B to V to E which is really YDS. Divide by zero error!
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 1, 2007, 2:11 AM
Post #102 of 241
(10520 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
rockforlife wrote: just to put it out there A V0 is a 5.11a...
Only where people don't know how to rate things.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
rockforlife
Dec 1, 2007, 3:31 PM
Post #103 of 241
(10480 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2002
Posts: 563
|
or thats just how the scale goes one of the two...
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Dec 1, 2007, 3:54 PM
Post #104 of 241
(10470 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Seems to me the V and the E are all about peoples' feelings.
V was invented cause the B was too tough and didn't provide enough wiggle room to measure penis sizes properly.
Now E is invented to gently coddle those who cannot get it up for the V.
Coulda kept the old ratings, they worked OK.
V&E are Way Emo.
DMT
(This post was edited by dingus on Dec 1, 2007, 3:54 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
nivlac
Dec 1, 2007, 4:53 PM
Post #105 of 241
(10460 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2003
Posts: 141
|
shurafa wrote: cracklover wrote: Well, like it or not, looks like the OP is getting his way. A new system is catching on. I'm a routesetter at the local gym. Just got an email from the manager, that said, in part: Our Manager wrote: On another note we’re going to start using “E” grades. I’ve long thought of something similar, but this isn’t my original, it’s take from routesetter.com. Basically it’s a new boulder problem grading system for the easy climbs below VO. Presently we’ve lumped them all into the vague “VO-“ group. Instead we’ll start to use E grades with E9 being the equivalent of 5.9, E8 of 5.8 and so on. Many people come into the gym having never climbed before and are disappointed to learn that they can’t just hop on the ropes. We direct them often to the bouldering area and this grading system will make it easier for them and for the rest of us just looking to do easier problems. This will take some getting used to, but please be patient; in the long run it’ll make for a better system. GO There is a real legitimate need for this system. I am glad that it is catching on. Now the key will be to standardize it so that it makes sense when you go from one gym to another. I have been using the Yosemite Decimal system at the gyms I set at with bouldering problems ranging from 5.4-5.9. This is equivalent to X4-X9 (or E4-E9 ect..). The bottom line is you want a brand new climber to be able to come into a gym and hop on a route and be able to find a route that they are able to climb. Its an exciting time to be a climber! The industry is evolving all the time.
You guys ever think about how exactly this would be done? I was thinking in terms of your average routesetter... I'm guessing at the average smaller gym, getting people to set something generically easier isn't too hard, but I'll bet you'll get some funny conversations about ratings.
Manager, "I asked you to set a X4, not a X6"
Setter, "Er... sorry, don't know the difference."
Shurafa and hiyapokey, you guys ever ask to set some problems on your own? That might also be a possibility - tape a few problems, use your creativity, be imaginative!
Good luck to all the routesetters out there...  I'm sure they're up to it, but I don't know that the poor saps want to be bothered by it.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 1, 2007, 6:20 PM
Post #106 of 241
(10448 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
rockforlife wrote: or thats just how the scale goes one of the two...
Yeah, guess which one? Why don't you now reply again, insisting once more that you know what you're talking about--when you clearly don't?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
shurafa
Dec 1, 2007, 6:29 PM
Post #107 of 241
(10443 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 21, 2005
Posts: 58
|
nivlac wrote: shurafa wrote: cracklover wrote: Well, like it or not, looks like the OP is getting his way. A new system is catching on. I'm a routesetter at the local gym. Just got an email from the manager, that said, in part: Our Manager wrote: On another note we’re going to start using “E” grades. I’ve long thought of something similar, but this isn’t my original, it’s take from routesetter.com. Basically it’s a new boulder problem grading system for the easy climbs below VO. Presently we’ve lumped them all into the vague “VO-“ group. Instead we’ll start to use E grades with E9 being the equivalent of 5.9, E8 of 5.8 and so on. Many people come into the gym having never climbed before and are disappointed to learn that they can’t just hop on the ropes. We direct them often to the bouldering area and this grading system will make it easier for them and for the rest of us just looking to do easier problems. This will take some getting used to, but please be patient; in the long run it’ll make for a better system. GO There is a real legitimate need for this system. I am glad that it is catching on. Now the key will be to standardize it so that it makes sense when you go from one gym to another. I have been using the Yosemite Decimal system at the gyms I set at with bouldering problems ranging from 5.4-5.9. This is equivalent to X4-X9 (or E4-E9 ect..). The bottom line is you want a brand new climber to be able to come into a gym and hop on a route and be able to find a route that they are able to climb. Its an exciting time to be a climber! The industry is evolving all the time. You guys ever think about how exactly this would be done? I was thinking in terms of your average routesetter... I'm guessing at the average smaller gym, getting people to set something generically easier isn't too hard, but I'll bet you'll get some funny conversations about ratings. Manager, "I asked you to set a X4, not a X6" Setter, "Er... sorry, don't know the difference." Shurafa and hiyapokey, you guys ever ask to set some problems on your own? That might also be a possibility - tape a few problems, use your creativity, be imaginative! Good luck to all the routesetters out there... I'm sure they're up to it, but I don't know that the poor saps want to be bothered by it.
Yes I have set many Sub V0 bouldering problems. It is not that difficult. The difference between an X4 and an X6 is the same as a 5.4 and a 5.6 which people do all the time. Rating will always be subjective.
Arguing the difference between a 5.4 and a 5.6 is fairly subtle. Both problems are withing in the same range. If you get someone who is brand new to climbing they should be able to get on the problem and have some fun with it. Now compare it to the current system where that same X4 or X6 is lumped in with all the other V0s. Put a brand new climber on a true V0 and they will most likely not even get off the ground. Its pretty obvious that this system is flawed and I am glad to see that people are taking steps to change it.
The hardest part will be educating existing climbers as people tend to get set in their ways. For new climbers it will not be an issue as they will not know any better. All they will be able to see is that they were able to send both a 5.4 top rope problem and an X4 boulder problem and will be psyched to come again!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Valarc
Dec 1, 2007, 6:45 PM
Post #108 of 241
(10435 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2007
Posts: 1473
|
I don't get the need for all this extra crap - I think the simplest system is "VB" for super easy and V0 for easy. The difference between a 5.4 and a 5.6 isn't terribly much, and not worth worrying about for a 4-move wonder. I prefer to call anything from 5.8-5.9ish a V0 and anything below a VB (B for beginner). I don't see all this need to invent new scales and have a different weird rating at every gym.
Hell, some of the best gyms I've been to had no ratings at all. It's bouldering, people, if you can't look at the first few holds and tell whether they are jugs or not, you should stick to video games. It's not like it takes a huge commitment to get on a boulder problem and be unable to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 1, 2007, 7:03 PM
Post #109 of 241
(10427 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
shurafa wrote: olderic wrote: Ironically 30+ years ago boulder problems at the lower end of the scale were often grdaed with a YDS grdae. Gabe - find a Hammond Pond guidebook from the 70's for reference. The John Gill Scale (B1-B3) was reserved for harder stuff - beyond the reach of most mortals. What goes around comes around. I can imagine that as bouldering grew as an offshoot of traditional rope climbing and hence started with the YDS scale. I dont know why a separate scale was needed at all. I guess it would have been confusing trying to tell the difference between a 5.12b boulder problem and a top roping problem. So I guess it makes sense that they would branch off the system. Once again why start the scale at 5.10=V0. Any history buffs out there know why they decided to start the scale at such a high difficulty level?
It's basically because the activity of bouldering itself, as defined by it's early practitioners in this country, began at quite a high level. B1 defined a boulder problem with moves on it that were as hard as any moves found on a roped climb. B2 was something harder than that--and B3 was a problem that had only been done once--and not repeated. Things that were easier than that were not really considered to be "bouldering" grade, per se. Today, bouldering seems to mean any climbing done without a rope that doesn't fall into the realm of free-soloing--so, the common usage definition has clearly changed.
Curt
(This post was edited by curt on Dec 1, 2007, 7:16 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
shurafa
Dec 1, 2007, 7:03 PM
Post #110 of 241
(10425 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 21, 2005
Posts: 58
|
Valarc wrote: I don't get the need for all this extra crap - I think the simplest system is "VB" for super easy and V0 for easy. The difference between a 5.4 and a 5.6 isn't terribly much, and not worth worrying about for a 4-move wonder. I prefer to call anything from 5.8-5.9ish a V0 and anything below a VB (B for beginner). I don't see all this need to invent new scales and have a different weird rating at every gym. Hell, some of the best gyms I've been to had no ratings at all. It's bouldering, people, if you can't look at the first few holds and tell whether they are jugs or not, you should stick to video games. It's not like it takes a huge commitment to get on a boulder problem and be unable to do it.
A V0 = 5.10 typically. Therefore your logic is equivalent to saying that all top roping problems less than 5.10 should be labeled 5B because it will make things simpler... That does not make sense.
Its also why almost all boulders top rope as well. However only a small percentage of top ropers actively boulder. This does not make sense as bouldering requires less equipment and is therefore cheaper. Yet is is less popular. The V plays a large role in this.
|
|
|
|
|
shurafa
Dec 1, 2007, 7:12 PM
Post #111 of 241
(10420 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 21, 2005
Posts: 58
|
curt wrote: shurafa wrote: olderic wrote: Ironically 30+ years ago boulder problems at the lower end of the scale were often grdaed with a YDS grdae. Gabe - find a Hammond Pond guidebook from the 70's for reference. The John Gill Scale (B1-B3) was reserved for harder stuff - beyond the reach of most mortals. What goes around comes around. I can imagine that as bouldering grew as an offshoot of traditional rope climbing and hence started with the YDS scale. I dont know why a separate scale was needed at all. I guess it would have been confusing trying to tell the difference between a 5.12b boulder problem and a top roping problem. So I guess it makes sense that they would branch off the system. Once again why start the scale at 5.10=V0. Any history buffs out there know why they decided to start the scale at such a high difficulty level? It's basically because the activity of bouldering itself, as defined by it's early practitioners in this country, began at a high level. B1 defined a boulder problem with moves on it that were as hard as any moves found on a roped climb. B2 was something harder than that--and B3 was a problem that had only been done once--and not repeated. Curt
Yes you mentioned this earlier. However how was the jump from B1 B2 B3 to V0-Vn... made?
|
|
|
|
|
Valarc
Dec 1, 2007, 7:26 PM
Post #112 of 241
(10417 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2007
Posts: 1473
|
shurafa wrote: A V0 = 5.10 typically. Therefore your logic is equivalent to saying that all top roping problems less than 5.10 should be labeled 5B because it will make things simpler... That does not make sense.
In ideal situations, this is true. However, I live in an area with quite a few gyms, and as is typical for gyms, their grades, especially their bouldering grades, are soft. Thus, a gym V0 around here is more like a 5.9 and to keep from hurting fragile customer egos you have to stay consistent with your area when rating indoor problems. It sucks but is standard in the gym scene, and we're talking about gyms here.
That said, your statement that "it's the same thing as rating all topropes below 5.10 as a 5B" is nonsense. A boulder problem is a few moves. A roped problem is a series of moves, which requires endurance and potentially a variety of techniques. One "5.9" move with a bunch of "5.6" moves might give a route that feels overall like a 5.8. In a boulder problem, it's so short that it's even tougher to tell the difference between the easier grades than it is with a roped route. I just don't see the point at nitpicking the difference between a 5.4 and a 5.7 when it's five moves long.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 1, 2007, 7:33 PM
Post #113 of 241
(10415 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
shurafa wrote: ...Yes you mentioned this earlier. However how was the jump from B1 B2 B3 to V0-Vn... made?
The V system was first used by John Sherman to define the difficulty of boulder problems in his first guide to Hueco Tanks. Sherman was attempting to create an open-ended rating system that would more accurately describe the difficulty of the many boulder problems within the park. He also was attempting to establish a rating system that would be "fixed" and not be a sliding scale--as was the "B" system.
After some agonizing over where to "pin" the V scale difficulty levels to a known system, Sherman decided that V1 would roughly equal 5.10+ and the scale would go from there. If you look in the back of either edition of Sherman's book, Stone Crusade, you will find a comparison chart of various bouldering ratings scales that I provided John for the book.
Obviously, the V rating system really caught on, and it is somewhat ironic that Sherman now wishes he would have never invented it--due to its unintended secondary effects.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
shurafa
Dec 1, 2007, 7:43 PM
Post #114 of 241
(10409 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 21, 2005
Posts: 58
|
curt wrote: shurafa wrote: ...Yes you mentioned this earlier. However how was the jump from B1 B2 B3 to V0-Vn... made? In reply to: After some agonizing over where to "pin" the V scale difficulty levels to a known system, Sherman decided that V1 would roughly equal 5.10+ and the scale would go from there. Thanks Curt! I have read the history so I know the basics. What I am looking for is some insight as to why he choose 5.10+ to "pin" the scale. It seems rather arbitrary and limiting in hindsight. However I am sure there was a seeming good reason at the time. Was anyone there during this process? Does anyone know how we could find this out? My guess is the people who designed the system were strong climbers and were mainly making the system for themselves. They would not have a need for problems less than 5.10 and hence that is where they started the scale. Once again I am speculating here however that seems plausible. I would like to note that I find it interesting that they choose to start the system at 5.10 as this was classically considered an "impossible climb" when the YDS was created. Half a century later this is the starting point for the easiest of problems for bouldering. This shows you that the sport is constantly evolving and growing. It makes sense that things will need to be redefined from time to time. Just as they were when the YDS was created and later the V Scale. The X scale is simply the next evolutionary step in this process...
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 1, 2007, 7:51 PM
Post #115 of 241
(10405 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
shurafa wrote: curt wrote: shurafa wrote: ...Yes you mentioned this earlier. However how was the jump from B1 B2 B3 to V0-Vn... made? In reply to: After some agonizing over where to "pin" the V scale difficulty levels to a known system, Sherman decided that V1 would roughly equal 5.10+ and the scale would go from there. Thanks Curt! I have read the history so I know the basics. What I am looking for is some insight as to why he choose 5.10+ to "pin" the scale. It seems rather arbitrary and limiting in hindsight. However I am sure there was a seeming good reason at the time. Was anyone there during this process? Does anyone know how we could find this out?. I think Sherman was merely being consistent with the broadly held belief that bouldering as an activity (as I stated earlier) started at a fairly high difficulty level. As an interesting aside, Sherman was originally going to assign the V1 designation to boulder problems of the the "El Murray" difficulty level, which would have meant that what we call V6 today would have been V1. After thinking it through for a while, he decided to begin the scale at a lower level. Curt
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Dec 2, 2007, 4:28 PM
Post #116 of 241
(10327 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
shurafa wrote: Put a brand new climber on a true V0 and they will most likely not even get off the ground. Its pretty obvious that this system is flawed and I am glad to see that people are taking steps to change it. The hardest part will be educating existing climbers as people tend to get set in their ways. For new climbers it will not be an issue as they will not know any better. All they will be able to see is that they were able to send both a 5.4 top rope problem and an X4 boulder problem and will be psyched to come again!!!
No, the hardest part will be that the bouldering walls were designed for bouldering. And that's bouldering in the sense that Curt describes it.
Bouldering has always been an "upper end" pursuit. No, I don't mean for the upper end of climbers. I mean for the upper limit of each (experienced, competent) climber. A way to work power and technique at the very edge of ability, close to the ground. Bouldering walls in gyms were designed to support this as well as possible. In most gyms they're overhung with big pads below.
Think about it. Purely from a safety perspective, climbs protected by pads, with jutting bolt-on holds on them, must be more overhung than climbs protected by ropes can be.
These bouldering areas will never be well set up to support the kind of climbing you seem so dead-set to have your friends be able to do. Ratings really have nothing to do with it. Yes, sure, I can set an E7 on the bouldering walls at my gym. But, frankly, it will consistently be crap compared to the 5.7s I can set on the roped wall.
Frankly, the only way to set a 5.7 on a 10 degree overhang is to make it a jug ladder.
What you really should be doing, if you want your friends to have a good time, is to take them to the area *designed* for beginner climbers - the low angled rope walls in the gym. This is where they can encounter interesting movements, can be challenged, can learn some of the actual fundamentals they'll need if they want to keep up with climbing. Frankly, by trying to change all the rest of us, you're simply doing your friends a disservice.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
rockforlife
Dec 2, 2007, 8:09 PM
Post #117 of 241
(10299 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2002
Posts: 563
|
18 5+ 5b HVS 5.10a VB
19 6a 5a E1 5.10b VB
19,20 6a+ 5b E2 5.10c VB
20,21 6b 6a E2, 5C E3 5.10d V0
21 6b+ 6a E3 5.11a V0
22 6c 6a E4 5.11b V1
23 6c+ 6a E4, 6b E4 5.11c V1
23/24 7a 6b E4, 6a E5 5.11d V2
24 7a+ 6a E5, 6c E5 5.12a V3
25 7b 6c E5 5.12b V4
26 7b+ 6b E6 5.12c V5
27 7c 6c E6 5.12d V6
28 7c+ 6c E7 5.13a V7
29 8a 7a E7 5.13b V8
30 8a+ 6c E8 5.13c V9
31 8b 7a E8 5.13d V10
32 8b+ 7a E9 5.14a V11
33 8c 7b E9 5.14b V12
34 8c+ 7a E10 5.14c V13
35 9a 7b E10 5.14d V14
36 9a+ 7b E10 5.15a V15
37 9a+ 7b E10 5.15b V16
this is just one of them i have seen i really don;t care what they are i just like to climb and pull as hard as i can so if that is 5.10 or 5.13, i'm just always fighting to get better.
|
|
|
|
|
rockforlife
Dec 3, 2007, 2:24 AM
Post #119 of 241
(10266 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2002
Posts: 563
|
curt wrote: 3) When you have already been proven wrong in an argument, stop arguing. Curt
?????? I don't know when you think that you proved me wrong. Again i really don't care, so i'm done with this post.
Nice to meet another nice climber on rc.com
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 3, 2007, 2:36 AM
Post #120 of 241
(10264 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
rockforlife wrote: curt wrote: 3) When you have already been proven wrong in an argument, stop arguing. Curt ?????? I don't know when you think that you proved me wrong. Again i really don't care, so i'm done with this post.
John Sherman said that V1 = 5.10+ whereas you said that V0 = 5.11a. So, unless you can substantiate how your version of reality trumps that of the guy who actually created the V system--I'd say you have been proven wrong.
rockforlife wrote: Nice to meet another nice climber on rc.com
Nice to meet another retarded climber on rc.com
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
marvinz
Dec 4, 2007, 5:35 AM
Post #121 of 241
(10203 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2006
Posts: 201
|
Question for Curt.
Philosopher saints, wounded egos and/or retards aside, how accurate do you think the linked table is regarding the comparison between V and Yosemite grades, or better yet, the comparison between V and French sport grades?
http://www.mec.ca/...id=10134198673781909
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Dec 4, 2007, 5:46 AM
Post #122 of 241
(10199 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
marvinz wrote: Question for Curt. Philosopher saints, wounded egos and/or retards aside, how accurate do you think the linked table is regarding the comparison between V and Yosemite grades, or better yet, the comparison between V and French sport grades? http://www.mec.ca/...id=10134198673781909
I would say that the correlation between the YDS and the V-scale there is fairly accurate. Thanks for the link.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
marvinz
Dec 4, 2007, 6:56 AM
Post #123 of 241
(10190 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 3, 2006
Posts: 201
|
curt wrote: marvinz wrote: Question for Curt. Philosopher saints, wounded egos and/or retards aside, how accurate do you think the linked table is regarding the comparison between V and Yosemite grades, or better yet, the comparison between V and French sport grades? http://www.mec.ca/...id=10134198673781909I would say that the correlation between the YDS and the V-scale there is fairly accurate. Thanks for the link. Curt
Thanks
In my estimation, the Yosemite/French comparison seems accurate too. But any informed opinion on this would be welcome.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 4, 2007, 7:46 AM
Post #124 of 241
(10183 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
curt wrote: marvinz wrote: Question for Curt. Philosopher saints, wounded egos and/or retards aside, how accurate do you think the linked table is regarding the comparison between V and Yosemite grades, or better yet, the comparison between V and French sport grades? http://www.mec.ca/...id=10134198673781909I would say that the correlation between the YDS and the V-scale there is fairly accurate. Thanks for the link. Curt
V0 = 5.9?
V4 spans 3 YDS letter grades, when there is a 1-1 correspondence between most other V-grades and YDS letter grades?
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
bizarrodrinker
Dec 4, 2007, 12:34 PM
Post #125 of 241
(10895 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 20, 2005
Posts: 2316
|
I think its a bit outdated as V14 isn't even on the list not to metion V15.
Not that I would know the comparison if they were.
|
|
|
|
|
|
