|
camhead
Sep 30, 2009, 7:40 PM
Post #51 of 78
(1298 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
Arrogant_Bastard wrote: So if a guy climbs halfway up a route, gets stymied but doesn't ever hang on gear, backs off, and comes back the next day and sends - is it a redpoint or an onsight? 
We've had this discussion before. If you don't weight the rope, it's legit. Even if you fall and crater before the rope catches you, you can get back on the climb, send, and claim an onsight.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 30, 2009, 7:47 PM
Post #52 of 78
(1294 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I am merely suggesting that many people believe (I'm on the fence) that it's only "trad" if it's ground up onsight. No knowledgeable climber would claim that only onsighting counts as "trad." As Jeff Smoot writes in the introduction to Rock Climbing Washington: Jeff Smoot wrote: In the old days, ... [m]any a "free first ascent" was done yo-yo style, with climbers taking turns climbing higher than their partner, placing another piece of gear, calling off and lowering, until one of them actually finished the pitch without falling off. Many FFAs in Joshua Tree were done in this style, as well. Jay But I consider that different than redpointing. That was not my point. You said that unless a route was climbed on sight, it was not "trad." That is false. Jay And that is not what i said. I said many people believe that. I said I was on the fence.
My mistake. You did say that many people believe that in order for an ascent to be "trad" it has to be onsight. And I'll repeat my original response: No. No knowledgeable climber believes that. It is patently false. Yo-yo ascents are not on-sight ascents, and yet are accepted free "trad" ascents. Guidebooks list FAs done in that style as free ascents, without qualification. You have no reason to sit on the fence about this.
In reply to: I was merely suggesting that redpointing as a discussion is the realm of sport climbing.
That claim, as phrased, is even less clear than it was the last time I said it was unclear. I have no idea what the phrase "redpointing as a discussion" means. Redpointing is not a discussion; it is a climbing style. If you define a redpoint to be any free ascent, other than a flash, then the term includes yo-yo ascents, and hence at least one type of redpoint ascent qualifies as a traditional climbing style, even if the word "redpoint" originated in a sport context. I have no idea if that addresses your claim or not, because your claim seems to be more ambiguous with each restatement of it.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Sep 30, 2009, 7:49 PM
Post #53 of 78
(1283 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I am merely suggesting that many people believe (I'm on the fence) that it's only "trad" if it's ground up onsight. No knowledgeable climber would claim that only onsighting counts as "trad." As Jeff Smoot writes in the introduction to Rock Climbing Washington: Jeff Smoot wrote: In the old days, ... [m]any a "free first ascent" was done yo-yo style, with climbers taking turns climbing higher than their partner, placing another piece of gear, calling off and lowering, until one of them actually finished the pitch without falling off. Many FFAs in Joshua Tree were done in this style, as well. Jay But I consider that different than redpointing. That was not my point. You said that unless a route was climbed on sight, it was not "trad." That is false. Jay And that is not what i said. I said many people believe that. I said I was on the fence. My mistake. You did say that many people believe that in order for an ascent to be "trad" it has to be onsight. And I'll repeat my original response: No. No knowledgeable climber believes that. It is patently false. Yo-yo ascents are not on-sight ascents, and yet are accepted free "trad" ascents. Guidebooks list FAs done in that style as free ascents, without qualification. You have no reason to sit on the fence about this. In reply to: I was merely suggesting that redpointing as a discussion is the realm of sport climbing. That claim, as phrased, is even less clear than it was the last time I said it was unclear. I have no idea what the phrase "redpointing as a discussion" means. Redpointing is not a discussion; it is a climbing style. If you define a redpoint to be any free ascent, other than a flash, then the term includes yo-yo ascents, and hence at least one type of redpoint ascent qualifies as a traditional climbing style, even if the word "redpoint" originated in a sport context. I have no idea if that addresses your claim or not, because your claim seems to be more ambiguous with each restatement of it. Jay
Are we having a discussion about redpointing?
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 30, 2009, 7:55 PM
Post #54 of 78
(1272 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
camhead wrote: Arrogant_Bastard wrote: So if a guy climbs halfway up a route, gets stymied but doesn't ever hang on gear, backs off, and comes back the next day and sends - is it a redpoint or an onsight? We've had this discussion before. If you don't weight the rope, it's legit. Even if you fall and crater before the rope catches you, you can get back on the climb, send, and claim an onsight.
Nice work, AB.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Sep 30, 2009, 7:58 PM
Post #55 of 78
(1265 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
jt512 wrote: camhead wrote: Arrogant_Bastard wrote: So if a guy climbs halfway up a route, gets stymied but doesn't ever hang on gear, backs off, and comes back the next day and sends - is it a redpoint or an onsight? We've had this discussion before. If you don't weight the rope, it's legit. Even if you fall and crater before the rope catches you, you can get back on the climb, send, and claim an onsight. Nice work, AB. Jay
If you guys really want some entertainment, check out this thread on trad FAs:
http://www.redriverclimbing.com/viewtopic.php?t=12069
Pay particular attention to the last page. Usually I go to that site to get away form the rc.knob grommets, but I failed in that today.
|
|
|
|
|
churningindawake
Sep 30, 2009, 8:04 PM
Post #56 of 78
(1259 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 5, 2007
Posts: 5292
|
I dont like to give up. I usually will try until I am able to redpoint a route. Although as someone else mentioned, sometimes road trips end and I might not get back to the route, or at least sometimes not for a long time.
So IMO just keep trying if you can until you succeed. It might only be once a year, but you are still making an attempt to send the route.
Wolfgang
(This post was edited by churningindawake on Sep 30, 2009, 8:07 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 30, 2009, 8:04 PM
Post #57 of 78
(1257 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I am merely suggesting that many people believe (I'm on the fence) that it's only "trad" if it's ground up onsight. No knowledgeable climber would claim that only onsighting counts as "trad." As Jeff Smoot writes in the introduction to Rock Climbing Washington: Jeff Smoot wrote: In the old days, ... [m]any a "free first ascent" was done yo-yo style, with climbers taking turns climbing higher than their partner, placing another piece of gear, calling off and lowering, until one of them actually finished the pitch without falling off. Many FFAs in Joshua Tree were done in this style, as well. Jay But I consider that different than redpointing. That was not my point. You said that unless a route was climbed on sight, it was not "trad." That is false. Jay And that is not what i said. I said many people believe that. I said I was on the fence. My mistake. You did say that many people believe that in order for an ascent to be "trad" it has to be onsight. And I'll repeat my original response: No. No knowledgeable climber believes that. It is patently false. Yo-yo ascents are not on-sight ascents, and yet are accepted free "trad" ascents. Guidebooks list FAs done in that style as free ascents, without qualification. You have no reason to sit on the fence about this. In reply to: I was merely suggesting that redpointing as a discussion is the realm of sport climbing. That claim, as phrased, is even less clear than it was the last time I said it was unclear. I have no idea what the phrase "redpointing as a discussion" means. Redpointing is not a discussion; it is a climbing style. If you define a redpoint to be any free ascent, other than a flash, then the term includes yo-yo ascents, and hence at least one type of redpoint ascent qualifies as a traditional climbing style, even if the word "redpoint" originated in a sport context. I have no idea if that addresses your claim or not, because your claim seems to be more ambiguous with each restatement of it. Jay Are we having a discussion about redpointing?
Yes. What isn't clear is whether we are having a discussion about sport climbing, specifically, or not. I'm not going to keep guessing what your claim is, if you even have one. If you'd care to make one, and word it unambiguously, I'd be happy to discuss it.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Sep 30, 2009, 8:06 PM
Post #58 of 78
(1253 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
camhead wrote: jt512 wrote: camhead wrote: Arrogant_Bastard wrote: So if a guy climbs halfway up a route, gets stymied but doesn't ever hang on gear, backs off, and comes back the next day and sends - is it a redpoint or an onsight? We've had this discussion before. If you don't weight the rope, it's legit. Even if you fall and crater before the rope catches you, you can get back on the climb, send, and claim an onsight. Nice work, AB. Jay If you guys really want some entertainment, check out this thread on trad FAs: http://www.redriverclimbing.com/viewtopic.php?t=12069 Pay particular attention to the last page. Usually I go to that site to get away form the rc.knob grommets, but I failed in that today.
I didn't read the whole thing? Did he ever redpoint it?
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Sep 30, 2009, 8:13 PM
Post #59 of 78
(1242 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I am merely suggesting that many people believe (I'm on the fence) that it's only "trad" if it's ground up onsight. No knowledgeable climber would claim that only onsighting counts as "trad." As Jeff Smoot writes in the introduction to Rock Climbing Washington: Jeff Smoot wrote: In the old days, ... [m]any a "free first ascent" was done yo-yo style, with climbers taking turns climbing higher than their partner, placing another piece of gear, calling off and lowering, until one of them actually finished the pitch without falling off. Many FFAs in Joshua Tree were done in this style, as well. Jay But I consider that different than redpointing. That was not my point. You said that unless a route was climbed on sight, it was not "trad." That is false. Jay And that is not what i said. I said many people believe that. I said I was on the fence. My mistake. You did say that many people believe that in order for an ascent to be "trad" it has to be onsight. And I'll repeat my original response: No. No knowledgeable climber believes that. It is patently false. Yo-yo ascents are not on-sight ascents, and yet are accepted free "trad" ascents. Guidebooks list FAs done in that style as free ascents, without qualification. You have no reason to sit on the fence about this. In reply to: I was merely suggesting that redpointing as a discussion is the realm of sport climbing. That claim, as phrased, is even less clear than it was the last time I said it was unclear. I have no idea what the phrase "redpointing as a discussion" means. Redpointing is not a discussion; it is a climbing style. If you define a redpoint to be any free ascent, other than a flash, then the term includes yo-yo ascents, and hence at least one type of redpoint ascent qualifies as a traditional climbing style, even if the word "redpoint" originated in a sport context. I have no idea if that addresses your claim or not, because your claim seems to be more ambiguous with each restatement of it. Jay Are we having a discussion about redpointing? What isn't clear is whether we are having a discussion about sport climbing, specifically, or not. I'm not going to keep guessing what your claim is, if you even have one. If you'd care to make one, and word it unambiguously, I'd be happy to discuss it. Jay
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 30, 2009, 8:15 PM
Post #60 of 78
(1236 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: I am merely suggesting that many people believe (I'm on the fence) that it's only "trad" if it's ground up onsight. No knowledgeable climber would claim that only onsighting counts as "trad." As Jeff Smoot writes in the introduction to Rock Climbing Washington: Jeff Smoot wrote: In the old days, ... [m]any a "free first ascent" was done yo-yo style, with climbers taking turns climbing higher than their partner, placing another piece of gear, calling off and lowering, until one of them actually finished the pitch without falling off. Many FFAs in Joshua Tree were done in this style, as well. Jay But I consider that different than redpointing. That was not my point. You said that unless a route was climbed on sight, it was not "trad." That is false. Jay And that is not what i said. I said many people believe that. I said I was on the fence. My mistake. You did say that many people believe that in order for an ascent to be "trad" it has to be onsight. And I'll repeat my original response: No. No knowledgeable climber believes that. It is patently false. Yo-yo ascents are not on-sight ascents, and yet are accepted free "trad" ascents. Guidebooks list FAs done in that style as free ascents, without qualification. You have no reason to sit on the fence about this. In reply to: I was merely suggesting that redpointing as a discussion is the realm of sport climbing. That claim, as phrased, is even less clear than it was the last time I said it was unclear. I have no idea what the phrase "redpointing as a discussion" means. Redpointing is not a discussion; it is a climbing style. If you define a redpoint to be any free ascent, other than a flash, then the term includes yo-yo ascents, and hence at least one type of redpoint ascent qualifies as a traditional climbing style, even if the word "redpoint" originated in a sport context. I have no idea if that addresses your claim or not, because your claim seems to be more ambiguous with each restatement of it. Jay Are we having a discussion about redpointing? What isn't clear is whether we are having a discussion about sport climbing, specifically, or not. I'm not going to keep guessing what your claim is, if you even have one. If you'd care to make one, and word it unambiguously, I'd be happy to discuss it. Jay
I still have no idea what point, if any, you are attempting to make. However, I know, at this point, you are intentionally obfuscating it.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Sep 30, 2009, 8:20 PM
Post #61 of 78
(1228 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
All right! That was a low blow! Intentionally using a word you know I would have to go look up. 
But yes. It didn't start out that way but I couldn't help myself. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
seatbeltpants
Sep 30, 2009, 9:19 PM
Post #62 of 78
(1206 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2008
Posts: 581
|
how about an ascent of the north face of the eiger that i was told about - dude climbed up to the railway tunnels on the first day, walked down the tunnel and slept in a hostel. the next day he walked back up the tunnel, exited back onto the face where he entered the previous evening, and finished the climb.
wtf is that called?
steve
|
|
|
|
|
dan4geng
Sep 30, 2009, 11:03 PM
Post #64 of 78
(1181 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 29, 2006
Posts: 64
|
In reply to: It's not a question of giving up, it's a question of wasting time. I would rather do as many new climbs as I can rather than spend a significant amount of time on one climb.
I think your logic is faulty.
Projecting a route will make you a stonger climber.... The stronger you are the more options you'll have for trying new routes.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Oct 1, 2009, 2:32 AM
Post #65 of 78
(1159 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
In reply to: Well, for no other reason beyond the fact that I wouldn't know what to call it, when I do a route clean after the first time of not doing it clean, regardless if it is trad or sport, I call it a redpoint...even in the 'Gunks. I guess redpointing probably came from sport, but I'm not so sure it can't apply to trad, too. For me, it is simply a clean attempt on a route after a failed attempt. If that isn't a redpoint because it took place on a trad route, then what would it be otherwise?
Rep POinting came from the same place as the word Quickdraw, the French climbing scene.
Quick Draw, was actually a way of making fun of American cowboy movies while climbing. The term stuck and was translated to English in the 80"s.
Red Pointing actually has a longer history. Routes in France were often established as aid lines in the early part of the century. Eventually, just like in America, routes started to go free. When a route was free, a red dot was painted at the start of the route. (Regardless of it being a gear route or a bolted route). The red dot was carried over to when people put up new routes too. Once the route was freed, a red dot was added to base. (In America, climber tied a piece of string ot taped the first bolt till the line was sent.Still do for some strange reason)
As for red pointing trad, yes. Ron Kauk red pointed is 5.14 in Yosemite. Caldwell Red Pointed Lurking Fear on Elcap. Steph Davis red-pointed the Phoenix. the list goes on and on. Same is true of Crack of Fear in the Gunks, and the Prow on Cathedral.
Yo-yo tactics were the early version of Rep Points, but we've evolved as climbers.
Climbers onsighting hard routes red point even harder routes. Both trad or sport.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Oct 1, 2009, 5:37 AM
Post #66 of 78
(1135 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
camhead wrote: ...We're going to be at the Gunks again over Columbus Day weekend again, if you guys want to meet up!
Can I come too? Please? Can I? Can I?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Oct 1, 2009, 11:45 AM
Post #67 of 78
(1118 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
dan4geng wrote: In reply to: It's not a question of giving up, it's a question of wasting time. I would rather do as many new climbs as I can rather than spend a significant amount of time on one climb. I think your logic is faulty. Projecting a route will make you a stonger climber.... The stronger you are the more options you'll have for trying new routes.
Thanks for telling me that what I enjoy out of climbing is faulty. Would you like to comment on my character flaws as well. Perhaps you would like to tell me that I made a poor career choice.
It wasn't about logic, it was about what I enjoy. I do not like to spend a lot of time on one climb. What don't you understand?
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Oct 1, 2009, 11:50 AM
Post #68 of 78
(1117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
camhead wrote: We're going to be at the Gunks again over Columbus Day weekend again, if you guys want to meet up!
Until Curt responded to you, I missed that one. I think we might be down there. If you want to meet up for drinks let me know.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Oct 1, 2009, 1:24 PM
Post #69 of 78
(1099 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
curt wrote: camhead wrote: ...We're going to be at the Gunks again over Columbus Day weekend again, if you guys want to meet up! Can I come too? Please? Can I? Can I? Curt
Yeah, but you have to buy the first round!
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Oct 1, 2009, 1:39 PM
Post #70 of 78
(1089 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
curt wrote: camhead wrote: ...We're going to be at the Gunks again over Columbus Day weekend again, if you guys want to meet up! Can I come too? Please? Can I? Can I? Curt
Hell yes! Book plane ticket now!
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Oct 1, 2009, 1:41 PM
Post #71 of 78
(1086 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: camhead wrote: We're going to be at the Gunks again over Columbus Day weekend again, if you guys want to meet up! Until Curt responded to you, I missed that one. I think we might be down there. If you want to meet up for drinks let me know. Josh
Sweet, yeah. I'm still not sure where we're planning on climbing, or staying, but we should totally meet up sometime there. Look for a guy with two small, strong, climber women (clausti and lena_chita).
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Oct 1, 2009, 2:19 PM
Post #72 of 78
(1070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
guangzhou wrote: Red Pointing actually has a longer history. Routes in France were often established as aid lines in the early part of the century. Eventually, just like in America, routes started to go free. When a route was free, a red dot was painted at the start of the route. (Regardless of it being a gear route or a bolted route). The red dot was carried over to when people put up new routes too. Once the route was freed, a red dot was added to base. (In America, climber tied a piece of string ot taped the first bolt till the line was sent.Still do for some strange reason)
I think your history is a bit off here. Usually the "redpoint" concept is addtributed soecufically to Kurt Albert (sp?) in the Krankenjura (sp?) Germany 25 years ago. First circles at the base of the then fill them in with red paint after the free ascent.
Also I'm not sure how mush aid climbing was done in France a century ago - that was more of a Eastern Alps thing.
Red tagging a route in progress is marginally related to red pointing - but the key idea is different.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Oct 1, 2009, 2:23 PM
Post #73 of 78
(1068 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
jt512 wrote: If you define a redpoint to be any free ascent, other than a flash, Jay
Calling a splitting hairs technical here. By definition redpoints and flashes are not mutually exclusive. flashes are a proper subset of redpoints and onsights are proper subsets of both. You like to pontificate about that all the time.
|
|
|
|
|
dan4geng
Oct 1, 2009, 3:42 PM
Post #74 of 78
(1053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 29, 2006
Posts: 64
|
Hey now. Don’t get your boxers in a bunch. I’m not saying what you enjoy is faulty. Nor am I making a personal attack against you. I'm just suggesting you should give projecting a chance. It’s a really challenging yet rewarding process that in the end will make you improve as a climber.
My biggest motivation in climbing is to improve. Projecting is great because you get to see measurable improvement. I think it is such a cool process...You get on a route that you can barely do the moves. Then after a lot of work and some frustration, you start to make progress and start to believe that you can do it. After some more work and frustration the route starts to feel easy and before you know it you're clipping the chains.
I think the problem is that a lot of people never get past the initial phase of projecting which is the most frustrating. When you’re not making much progress and you feel like your wasting your time because you'll never be able to do the route. Its times like these that you need to be psyched on the baby steps (one better foot placement, a new high point even it is just one hold higher)
Blueeyedclimber… by all means do whatever you enjoy! I can understand that motivations for climbing might be different than mine. But how could you not want to improve?
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Oct 1, 2009, 4:26 PM
Post #75 of 78
(1037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
dan4geng wrote: Hey now. Don’t get your boxers in a bunch. I’m not saying what you enjoy is faulty. Nor am I making a personal attack against you.
In reply to: I'm just suggesting you should give projecting a chance. It’s a really challenging yet rewarding process that in the end will make you improve as a climber.
I am fully aware of the benefits to projecting. One of my goals is to improve, but perhaps my greatest motivation is just to get on as many stellar climbs as I can. Sometimes that means I have to get better.
In reply to: My biggest motivation in climbing is to improve. Projecting is great because you get to see measurable improvement. I think it is such a cool process...You get on a route that you can barely do the moves. Then after a lot of work and some frustration, you start to make progress and start to believe that you can do it. After some more work and frustration the route starts to feel easy and before you know it you're clipping the chains.
Another thing that prevents me from projecting is what I call the bouldering mentality. It always helps to have at least one other person projecting with you. My main partner is my wife. I love climbing with her and she is pretty strong, but she will not be projecting the same climbs as me. I feel that for projecting to be fun, you need to do it with others, and I just am not in that position very often.
In reply to: I think the problem is that a lot of people never get past the initial phase of projecting which is the most frustrating. When you’re not making much progress and you feel like your wasting your time because you'll never be able to do the route. Its times like these that you need to be psyched on the baby steps (one better foot placement, a new high point even it is just one hold higher)
When I mentioned wasting time, I didn't mean it in the sense like projecting doesn't work, therefore it's a waste of time. What I meant was that if I spend a lot of time on this one climb, I am not able to do all these other great climbs.
In reply to: Blueeyedclimber… by all means do whatever you enjoy! I can understand that motivations for climbing might be different than mine. But how could you not want to improve?
Like I said, I definitely want to improve, but upping the physical difficulty is only one aspect of that. Sometimes I get just as amped to do something mentally demanding.
Peace out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
