|
stevo
Nov 22, 2002, 7:31 PM
Post #1 of 2
(632 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 99
|
W5 - Vertical, no rests, full pitch or shorter and hard, supposedly feels like 5.9
W6 - As hard as ice gets, bad ice, vertical to overhanging, ice of nasty proportions,
According to will gadd any fit climber with new tools can climb this, do you think this is true?
W7 - Does this really exist? If it does, does it exist beyond the FA, b/c supposedly all subsequent climbers find the conditions easier.
I ask these questions b/c the grades are so subjective. I never am sure if a pitch was 4+ or 5. W5 feels harder than 5.9, and so does 6, what equivalence do they feel to you?
I just want some clarification about these grades. I have supposedly climbed these grades before, but I can never figure out the dividing lines, I am never truly sure.
I can figure out 6+ and 4 and below, but between these, no idea??
thanks
|
|
|
|
|
tim
Nov 22, 2002, 7:43 PM
Post #2 of 2
(632 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 4, 2002
Posts: 4861
|
5 is a lot harder than 5.9 in my book, 5.9 usually is pretty casual, whereas WI5 is not casual unless you spend a lot of time on the ice! (Alden Pellett runs laps on WI5+, solo, but he spends a lot of time on the ice... and is a bold guy even on rock) WI6 is rare indeed, it's pretty clear from the definition you posted why there isn't a whole lot of it -- difficulty greater than WI5, but tough to get pro, maybe overhanging, etc.
Anything Will Gadd says should be taken with a metric ton of salt. He also equated climbing an 8000 meter peak with hiking. Not that he's ever done the former, but hey, as long as it pisses people off...
|
|
|
|
|
|
