|
ensonik
Aug 5, 2010, 2:52 AM
Post #26 of 55
(5083 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2009
Posts: 134
|
johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: curious: how tall are you. 5'4 Told you Greg.
What's going on here?
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 5, 2010, 2:53 AM
Post #27 of 55
(5080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
ensonik wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: curious: how tall are you. 5'4 Told you Greg. What's going on here?
Greg heard that Modern Times was hard for short people and now doesn't trust my encouragement for him to do the route.
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 5, 2010, 2:55 AM
Post #28 of 55
(5078 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
bill413 wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Edited to add: What?? This gunks 5.6 warmup has a ROOF on it? The Gunks 5.3 warmup might very well have a roof on it. Nah - Gelsa is 5.4 (but yeah, the roofs are 5.3)
Broken Sling is 5.3
|
|
|
|
|
bill413
Aug 5, 2010, 3:46 AM
Post #29 of 55
(5070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 19, 2004
Posts: 5674
|
johnwesely wrote: bill413 wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Edited to add: What?? This gunks 5.6 warmup has a ROOF on it? The Gunks 5.3 warmup might very well have a roof on it. Nah - Gelsa is 5.4 (but yeah, the roofs are 5.3) Broken Sling is 5.3
Hmmm...I've missed that one. Worthwhile?
|
|
|
|
|
kobaz
Aug 5, 2010, 12:24 PM
Post #30 of 55
(5030 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2004
Posts: 726
|
johnwesely wrote: ensonik wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: curious: how tall are you. 5'4 Told you Greg. What's going on here? Greg heard that Modern Times was hard for short people and now doesn't trust my encouragement for him to do the route.
Hehe. I didn't think any particular single move was hard, it's just there's a lot of moves where you're mostly hanging and it's easy to get pumped.
Picture from the top:
View of High E Ledge on our way down.
The long exposure makes it look lighter than it is. Those were shot with a 10 second shutter speed.
|
|
|
|
|
Jnclk
Aug 5, 2010, 1:17 PM
Post #31 of 55
(5018 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2007
Posts: 89
|
kobaz wrote: Jnclk wrote: kobaz wrote: I can climb 12 in the gym, but I just really started getting into gunks 8's this year. Modern Times may be a bit sandbagged. But, perhaps the "12s" in your gym are a tad soft. The Gunks ratings aren't any stiffer than any other traditional areas that I've visited (Seneca, Adirondacks, Tahquitz/Suicide, Joshua Tree, Yosemite, Cochise etc.). I think gunks ratings are really stiff compared to elsewhere (Other than Dacks and Seneca). I've lead Yosemite 5.9/5.10 pretty comfortably, but I'll never attempt to lead gunks 5.10 for another few years. 5.9's in Indian Creek were a breeze. Most 5.9's in the gunks look scary and hard. And the one's I've toproped give me quite the pucker to think about leading them. I think the gym 12s I climbed at my old gym were probably on par with some of the softer areas. And by "climb 12s" I mean, flail like it's nobodys business and work my ass off, usually falling several times. Tobacco Road at The New made me work just as hard, although I didn't get very far. So... in conclusion... I think the gunks is pretty stiff. It's got the hardest 5.7's I've ever done. Edited to add: What?? This gunks 5.6 warmup has a ROOF on it?
Well then you don't climb 12. No biggie, lots of people don't. Don't delude yourself into thinking that since you can "flail your way up" a "12" in your gym on TR will translate into success on gear routes.
Cracks in Yosemite and IC can be (certainly not all of them) more straight forward than climbs at The Gunks (i.e. very protectable with little to no route finding issues.).
The scariness of a route doesn't make the moves any harder. It just makes the lead more serious. Many of the harder routes at The Gunks often require significant fiddling of gear to get them adequately protected.
There are tons of G rated routes in the 5.9-5.10 range at The Gunks.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Aug 5, 2010, 2:07 PM
Post #32 of 55
(5008 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
bill413 wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Edited to add: What?? This gunks 5.6 warmup has a ROOF on it? The Gunks 5.3 warmup might very well have a roof on it. Nah - Gelsa is 5.4 (but yeah, the roofs are 5.3)
the first move off the anchor on the final pitch of YYYY?
Not really a roof, not really 5.3 either.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Aug 5, 2010, 2:09 PM
Post #33 of 55
(5007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
johnwesely wrote: ensonik wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: curious: how tall are you. 5'4 Told you Greg. What's going on here? Greg heard that Modern Times was hard for short people and now doesn't trust my encouragement for him to do the route.
still trying to decide to trust his answer.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Aug 5, 2010, 2:10 PM
Post #34 of 55
(5006 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
bill413 wrote: johnwesely wrote: bill413 wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Edited to add: What?? This gunks 5.6 warmup has a ROOF on it? The Gunks 5.3 warmup might very well have a roof on it. Nah - Gelsa is 5.4 (but yeah, the roofs are 5.3) Broken Sling is 5.3 Hmmm...I've missed that one. Worthwhile?
The second pitch is definitely 5.8, though. The first pitch, not even close.
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 5, 2010, 2:32 PM
Post #35 of 55
(4998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
kobaz wrote: johnwesely wrote: ensonik wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: curious: how tall are you. 5'4 Told you Greg. What's going on here? Greg heard that Modern Times was hard for short people and now doesn't trust my encouragement for him to do the route. Hehe. I didn't think any particular single move was hard, it's just there's a lot of moves where you're mostly hanging and it's easy to get pumped. Picture from the top: [img]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs131.ash2/39894_1472890456694_1066624581_31336295_2760944_n.jpg[/img] View of High E Ledge on our way down. [img]http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs143.ash2/40479_1472890536696_1066624581_31336296_4827815_n.jpg[/img] The long exposure makes it look lighter than it is. Those were shot with a 10 second shutter speed.
Did you use a tripod? Those pictures are wonderful.
|
|
|
|
|
hyhuu
Aug 5, 2010, 3:52 PM
Post #36 of 55
(4972 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2001
Posts: 492
|
johnwesely wrote: ensonik wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: curious: how tall are you. 5'4 Told you Greg. What's going on here? Greg heard that Modern Times was hard for short people and now doesn't trust my encouragement for him to do the route.
For crying out loud, it's only 5.8 go lead it.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Aug 5, 2010, 5:08 PM
Post #37 of 55
(4952 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
hyhuu wrote: johnwesely wrote: ensonik wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: Gmburns2000 wrote: curious: how tall are you. 5'4 Told you Greg. What's going on here? Greg heard that Modern Times was hard for short people and now doesn't trust my encouragement for him to do the route. For crying out loud, it's only 5.8 go lead it.
my apologies for not being as good as you. next time I will do better to ensure that my manliness is up to acceptable levels. again, I hope and pray for your sincere forgiveness.
|
|
|
|
|
kobaz
Aug 5, 2010, 6:13 PM
Post #38 of 55
(4941 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2004
Posts: 726
|
johnwesely wrote: Did you use a tripod? Those pictures are wonderful.
We used some rocks as a tripod.
|
|
|
|
|
kobaz
Aug 5, 2010, 6:19 PM
Post #39 of 55
(4940 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2004
Posts: 726
|
Jnclk wrote: Well then you don't climb 12. No biggie, lots of people don't. Don't delude yourself into thinking that since you can "flail your way up" a "12" in your gym on TR will translate into success on gear routes.
Yeah I agree. I don't have any delusions that I'm a 12 climber by any means. I probably should have wrote something along the lines of "some 8's in the gunks have given me more trouble than some gym 12s I've flailed on."
I consider myself pretty solid at 5.9 trad on well protected routes. I can onsite 5.11 sport/tr inside/outside on a good day.
Jnclk wrote: Cracks in Yosemite and IC can be (certainly not all of them) more straight forward than climbs at The Gunks (i.e. very protectable with little to no route finding issues.).
Yeah... I totally agree the cracks are just simpler/easier overall.
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 5, 2010, 6:48 PM
Post #40 of 55
(4930 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
kobaz wrote: johnwesely wrote: Did you use a tripod? Those pictures are wonderful. We used some rocks as a tripod.
What kind of camera?
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 5, 2010, 8:30 PM
Post #41 of 55
(4918 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: johnwesely wrote: Did you use a tripod? Those pictures are wonderful. We used some rocks as a tripod. What kind of camera?
One dem dere ones that takes tha pickshures. I seen it do that shit, let me tell you. I seen it.
|
|
|
|
|
kobaz
Aug 6, 2010, 2:42 AM
Post #42 of 55
(4890 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2004
Posts: 726
|
johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: johnwesely wrote: Did you use a tripod? Those pictures are wonderful. We used some rocks as a tripod. What kind of camera?
Ah yes... the camera... the camera makes all the difference.
Cannon 5d
And the lens too.... 16-35mm f/2.8 L
It's not my gear... so I get to drool too.
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Aug 6, 2010, 2:53 AM
Post #43 of 55
(4884 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
kobaz wrote: johnwesely wrote: kobaz wrote: johnwesely wrote: Did you use a tripod? Those pictures are wonderful. We used some rocks as a tripod. What kind of camera? Ah yes... the camera... the camera makes all the difference. Cannon 5d And the lens too.... 16-35mm f/2.8 L It's not my gear... so I get to drool too.
That first picture perfectly captures night climbing at the Gunks. I wish I was better at night photography. Shooting film makes it kind of difficult to practice though.
|
|
|
|
|
gitarooman
Aug 6, 2010, 3:13 AM
Post #44 of 55
(4878 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 40
|
kobaz wrote: Gunks 11d... nutty. The 5.9's are hard enough. The 9 facey climb to the left of Laurel always kicks my butt. At least I think it's a 9. It's got these little crystals you need to crimp on with one or two fingers almost the whole way.
Are you thinking of Coronary perhaps (R-rated 10 I believe)? It is definitely much more balancy and crimpy than Apoplexy. It is also between Apoplexy and Laurel
|
|
|
|
|
brokesomeribs
Aug 9, 2010, 10:28 PM
Post #45 of 55
(4821 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2009
Posts: 361
|
coolcat83 wrote: kobaz wrote: Gunks 11d... nutty. The 5.9's are hard enough. The 9 facey climb to the left of Laurel always kicks my butt. At least I think it's a 9. It's got these little crystals you need to crimp on with one or two fingers almost the whole way. Apoplexy, I've known more people to break ankles on that route than any other, just enough to catch your foot on on the way down and vertical enough to build up some speed before you hit it.
Truth. A friend of mine flew in from Israel for a week of Gunks climbnig. First day out, last route of the day was Apoplexy. He got off route at the crux, went too far to the right, and wound up taking a 18-20 footer down to the just-less-than-vertical section and broke his left foot and tibia (IIRC) on impact. Oh, and then drove his 5-speed Suby back down to NYC. Talk about a beast.
|
|
|
|
|
coolcat83
Aug 9, 2010, 10:34 PM
Post #46 of 55
(4819 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 27, 2007
Posts: 1007
|
brokesomeribs wrote: coolcat83 wrote: kobaz wrote: Gunks 11d... nutty. The 5.9's are hard enough. The 9 facey climb to the left of Laurel always kicks my butt. At least I think it's a 9. It's got these little crystals you need to crimp on with one or two fingers almost the whole way. Apoplexy, I've known more people to break ankles on that route than any other, just enough to catch your foot on on the way down and vertical enough to build up some speed before you hit it. Truth. A friend of mine flew in from Israel for a week of Gunks climbnig. First day out, last route of the day was Apoplexy. He got off route at the crux, went too far to the right, and wound up taking a 18-20 footer down to the just-less-than-vertical section and broke his left foot and tibia (IIRC) on impact. Oh, and then drove his 5-speed Suby back down to NYC. Talk about a beast.
I remember seeing you in the gunks that day, and in the gym parking lot later that night and you told me about that...it wasn't the first story I'd heard that goes the same way on that route.
|
|
|
|
|
welle
Aug 10, 2010, 4:54 PM
Post #47 of 55
(4794 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2008
Posts: 212
|
kobaz wrote: I think gunks ratings are really stiff compared to elsewhere (Other than Dacks and Seneca). I've lead Yosemite 5.9/5.10 pretty comfortably, but I'll never attempt to lead gunks 5.10 for another few years. 5.9's in Indian Creek were a breeze. Most 5.9's in the gunks look scary and hard. And the one's I've toproped give me quite the pucker to think about leading them.
You should give some a try, begin with Ant's Line and Bonnie's Roof (regular way) - they are on a soft side of 9s... Also, leaders see things differently, IMO, you just see more holds and possibilities than on a top-rope.
kobaz wrote: So... in conclusion... I think the gunks is pretty stiff. It's got the hardest 5.7's I've ever done.
Am curious, which one?
|
|
|
|
|
kobaz
Aug 11, 2010, 3:45 AM
Post #48 of 55
(4739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2004
Posts: 726
|
welle wrote: You should give some a try, begin with Ant's Line and Bonnie's Roof (regular way) - they are on a soft side of 9s... Also, leaders see things differently, IMO, you just see more holds and possibilities than on a top-rope.
Yeah... Bonnies is my next route of interest at the moment. I'll probably do modern times again beforehand and hopefully in better style.
welle wrote: kobaz wrote: So... in conclusion... I think the gunks is pretty stiff. It's got the hardest 5.7's I've ever done. Am curious, which one?
First pitch of Something Interesting... the crux move is just... hard for some reason. I've never before had to call out 'watch me' on a 5.7. And there's the crux of Tequila Mockingbird... you have a bolt at your chest, but there's a mostly blank face with some mono finger crimp moves on little crystals. I still can't figure out how to do the move... I've tried twice so far and I have to A0 it to get past that section.
|
|
|
|
|
cacalderon
Aug 14, 2010, 1:47 AM
Post #49 of 55
(4680 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 10, 2006
Posts: 150
|
good stuff, thx for sharing.
PS. don't know why john didn't lead the last pitch LOL
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Aug 17, 2010, 4:20 PM
Post #50 of 55
(4605 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
Ha Ha! You know, sometimes if I feel like I've had enough climbing for the day, I grab some popcorn and go plant myself at the base of High E. Between Modern times and High E, I know I'm guaranteed a good show. 
I see where you made a mistake, though. You never threw your second a knife 
http://www.rockclimbing.com/..._reply;so=ASC;mh=25;
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
|
