|
angry
Jul 26, 2008, 1:06 AM
Post #51 of 112
(2114 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 21, 2003
Posts: 8400
|
Resurection for the win?
|
|
|
|
|
Cogline
Jul 26, 2008, 7:25 AM
Post #52 of 112
(2091 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2008
Posts: 4
|
new zealand is definitely no sandbag. more a bit soft i found. especially wanaka. and castle hill got some feelgood problems too.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jul 26, 2008, 7:39 AM
Post #53 of 112
(2086 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26352
|
angry wrote: Resurection for the win?
This is rc.com, after all.
" so lonely and looking for big manful guy not afraid to take all see come my webcam naked teenage naked webcam hot pics!!! hott picxz! want to chat alone? one on one chat on my web page big manful watch me take 8 inches manful big sexy penish lesbian at mywebpage.eu! today!"
yowza Yowza YOWZA!Manful penish? and to think I've just been watching vids with the regular kind...
|
|
|
|
|
forkliftdaddy
Jul 26, 2008, 7:48 AM
Post #54 of 112
(2085 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2003
Posts: 408
|
I've heard it said about LRC that the older problems, the ones that folks could sneak in and do, the ones not visible from the golf course, are about right, and that the newer, legally developed problems are probably softer. Seems to ring true for me.
Anybody think HP40 is a bit sandbagged?
|
|
|
|
|
Factor2
Jul 26, 2008, 8:20 AM
Post #55 of 112
(2077 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 17, 2008
Posts: 188
|
Red Rocks is very soft. Many of the 12 sport routes felt more like 10's and all the long 5.8's were more like 5.4's. When the guidebook said that a pitch was runout, it seemed to mean that you had to go a full 10 feet without solid pro. 
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Jul 26, 2008, 8:24 AM
Post #56 of 112
(2075 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18681
|
I'm sure some places are a little baggy, but I suspect the vast majority of those reps are just the usual story from people who aren't used to the areas in question. Camhead accused me (jokingly) of sandbaggery last weekend at the New. Those routes weren't harder than their grades, though. He just wasn't used to the New's "style" of facey trad climbing. IC's "easy" tens would probably hand me my ass on a platter.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Jul 26, 2008, 8:38 AM
Post #57 of 112
(2070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4762
|
The Monastery. Killin' me.
|
|
|
|
|
Valarc
Jul 26, 2008, 8:50 AM
Post #58 of 112
(2066 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2007
Posts: 1473
|
forkliftdaddy wrote: Anybody think HP40 is a bit sandbagged?
Not really, at least at the lower grades I'm capable of climbing. I do get a kick out of some of the "controversial" ratings... Bum Boy being the classic example. I've heard everything from V2 to V5, depending on temperature, time of year, and phase of the moon. To me it felt V3 if you traverse out to the right and use the undercling (not really doing the problem IMHO), and easy v4 if you go straight up.
The warmup problems are often ridiculously soft. I've been on some "V1"s that felt more like 5.8, and plenty of the V2s feel soft as well. I can recall several problems (The Crown, Genesis, Moms to name a few) where I immediately thought "damn this is soft", and can't name one where I thought "this is sandbagged".
At the higher grades, things might be different, but you'll have to ask someone who isn't weak and fat for that one.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jul 26, 2008, 8:54 AM
Post #59 of 112
(2064 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26352
|
j_ung wrote: IC's "easy" tens would probably hand me my ass on a platter.
Since when did my words come out of your keyboard?
|
|
|
|
|
mturner
Jul 26, 2008, 9:06 AM
Post #60 of 112
(2058 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2005
Posts: 980
|
Rather than compare different places (apples to oranges), it would be more interesting to see if there is a psychological profile that sandbaggers have versus those that rate correctly or even soft.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jul 26, 2008, 9:10 AM
Post #61 of 112
(2054 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26352
|
"everyone will think I'm a badass if I rate this problem Vx, when really it's Vx+1, or even Vx+2".
That was the reason I had a few years ago when I had these issues where I thought everyone thought I was a pussy.
Everyone DID think I was a pussy, and still do.
What can I say? I'm a pussy.
|
|
|
|
|
mturner
Jul 26, 2008, 9:13 AM
Post #62 of 112
(2052 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2005
Posts: 980
|
sungam wrote: "everyone will think I'm a badass if I rate this problem Vx, when really it's Vx+1, or even Vx+2". That was the reason I had a few years ago when I had these issues where I thought everyone thought I was a pussy. Everyone DID think I was a pussy, and still do. What can I say? I'm a pussy.
That's kind of what I was getting at. It seems like everyone at my gym that sandbags has serious ego or insecurity problems. Just an observation.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Jul 26, 2008, 9:34 AM
Post #63 of 112
(2045 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26352
|
i don't know if that's always the reason, but it definitely is sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Jul 26, 2008, 9:58 AM
Post #64 of 112
(2035 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17613
|
j_ung wrote: I'm sure some places are a little baggy, but I suspect the vast majority of those reps are just the usual story from people who aren't used to the areas in question. Camhead accused me (jokingly) of sandbaggery last weekend at the New. Those routes weren't harder than their grades, though. He just wasn't used to the New's "style" of facey trad climbing. IC's "easy" tens would probably hand me my ass on a platter.
This is a lesson I seem to relearn just about every year. I'll spend months playing on gear protected face routes and then go on a crack binge and feel like I got weaker over night. Sandbaggers the lot of em!! It makes me feel better to think so anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Valarc
Jul 26, 2008, 10:24 AM
Post #65 of 112
(2025 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2007
Posts: 1473
|
mturner wrote: That's kind of what I was getting at. It seems like everyone at my gym that sandbags has serious ego or insecurity problems. Just an observation.
I sandbag most problems I set - and I can set problems significantly harder than I am able to climb. I do this for two reasons - one, gym climbers notoriously suck when they get outside. By sandbagging, a 5.9 gym climber actually has half a chance of flailing his way up a 5.9 outdoor climb. Most gym grades are soft, so I take it in the other direction to over-compensate. The second reason is, our gym is short. 25 feet of 5.11a isn't really good training for an outdoor 5.11, but if that 11a is really more like 11c, the climber might have a shot at having the strength to survive longer outdoor climbs. Not the most optimal solution but oh well.
My point is - I try to keep our gym consistently sandbagged, so no one person's ego is stroked, until they go to another gym and absolutely crush their problems.
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Jul 26, 2008, 11:00 AM
Post #66 of 112
(2012 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 8571
|
I'm just insecure in my setting to the point that I consistently sandbag just to prevent the dreaded "that's like a V3 dude, not a V6". I hate that.
|
|
|
|
|
skibum14
Jul 26, 2008, 9:49 PM
Post #67 of 112
(1962 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2008
Posts: 63
|
Index, WA is the only area I know of that I would say is pretty sandbagged. I haven't done too much climbing there (just getting into the trad game), but I've heard stories from friends. As an aside, it's hard to say an area is sandbagged if you're already expecting it to be sandbagged.
I've never heard Squamish is sandbagged - and from the climbing I've done there, it's definitely not. The Gunks aren't sandbagged, they just start their ratings at 5.3 instead of giving everything up to 5.10 a grade of 5.6 or 5.7. It's rather nice, actually: elsewhere, I've been on 5.7s that are walks in the park and ones that take lots of concentration.
As most of the more experienced people have said, sandbagging is very hard to define unless you have lots of experience on the type of rock and the style of climbing. A 5.8 hand crack can seem impossibly hard if you only climb slab, regardless of whether you climb 5.11 slab or not.
|
|
|
|
|
time2clmb
Jul 27, 2008, 12:40 PM
Post #69 of 112
(1891 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 26, 2007
Posts: 473
|
Squamish sandbagged LMFAO....NOT!
|
|
|
|
|
fresh
Jul 28, 2008, 7:19 AM
Post #70 of 112
(1812 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 6, 2007
Posts: 1199
|
I feel like compared to cathedral/whitehorse in new hampshire, rumney is pretty soft. but that may be because I learned to climb in a gym. 5.5 slabs scare the bejesus out of me and are harder than any 5.9 sport route... to me. actually I climbed a 10d slab at rumney (hammond organ) that felt easier than some spots on standard route (5.5) at whitehorse.
(This post was edited by fresh on Jul 28, 2008, 7:20 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Jul 28, 2008, 7:28 AM
Post #71 of 112
(1805 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4572
|
Yay for revived threads! While I usually don't whine about any route being sandbagged, I feel I was th evictim of one recently. NOw, I feel that if it at least it feels within a few letter grades, then I usually chalk it up to different styles and my lack of ability in that particular one.
I was recently on a classic 5.10a at Cathedral in NH. Now before I give the name, let me just say that I usually onsight 5.10a. ANd not just at certain areas. I have onsight 5.10a's in Yosemite, Squamish, the Gunks and in the same area of NH, both at Cathedral and WHitehorse. This 10a ate me up and spit me out. The climb is Nutcracker, a Henry Barber route (the climb was actually 5.9+ in the old guidebook). I have been on 11a's that were much easier.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Jul 29, 2008, 8:42 AM
Post #73 of 112
(1686 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9674
|
j_ung wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I was recently on a classic 5.10a at Cathedral in NH. Now before I give the name, let me just say that I usually onsight 5.10a. ANd not just at certain areas. I have onsight 5.10a's in Yosemite, Squamish, the Gunks and in the same area of NH, both at Cathedral and WHitehorse. This 10a ate me up and spit me out. The climb is Nutcracker, a Henry Barber route (the climb was actually 5.9+ in the old guidebook). I have been on 11a's that were much easier. One more reason why grades should never change. If it still had its old rating, you would have seen the "+" and expected the sandbag.
Just goes to show how one man's meat is another man's poison. I found Nutcracker to be one of the softer 10s I've done. Book of Solemnity, at the same grade, on the same wall, felt a solid number grade harder. And it's not just me! My seconds both climbed Nutcracker cleanly, but both fell repeatedly on The Book!
GO
|
|
|
|
|
wishiwasamonkey
Jul 29, 2008, 8:56 AM
Post #74 of 112
(1665 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 9, 2006
Posts: 51
|
What little I have climbed at the Muir Valley in Red River Gorge seemed exceptionally soft.
|
|
|
|
|
irregularpanda
Jul 29, 2008, 9:11 AM
Post #75 of 112
(1655 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 13, 2007
Posts: 1364
|
mturner wrote: sungam wrote: "everyone will think I'm a badass if I rate this problem Vx, when really it's Vx+1, or even Vx+2". That was the reason I had a few years ago when I had these issues where I thought everyone thought I was a pussy. Everyone DID think I was a pussy, and still do. What can I say? I'm a pussy. That's kind of what I was getting at. It seems like everyone at my gym that sandbags has serious ego or insecurity problems. Just an observation.
Some of the time. There are those who sandbag their grades in the gym.
There are those who soften up their grades in the gym.
There are those who never climb outside so they don't actually have a yardstick to measure it by.
And then there's me. I am better with technique, and so I put something up, call it 5.10b, and everybody thinks it's an .11b. Whatever, It's just the gym. I know that squamish is NOT sandbagged. This much is true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
