Someone who posts here at the rate, it says, of 1.6/day, has recently ridiculed me for climbing only 5.9. Actually, that is from a single occasion that really should be maybe, oh, let's say 5.86 or so, since it was only as second. To continue to be truthful, however, the belayer is a master climber in our area, and he did assure me, he being a supportive person, that I was climbing on that occasion at 5.9 level. I have no expectation of doing so again, so treasure that one incident as not an accident, even if unique.

Raising in my mind, more than once noted here as insane, a general question to this lovely and helpful community about what it takes to be considered by this lovely and helpful community "a real climber". Is it only difficulty level, or also time in the effort, and if so, how does that scale? Does a decade at 5.7 qualify? Does it have to include trad? Is it adjusted for number of attempts per year? Would how long, or number of climbs, it took to lead a 5.10 be a factor? What about indoors or outdoors? Type of rock? Does top-rope ever count? Perhaps the assessor's self-assessment is part of the judgment?

LL

Raising in my mind, more than once noted here as insane, a general question to this lovely and helpful community about what it takes to be considered by this lovely and helpful community "a real climber".

Someone who posts here at the rate, it says, of 1.6/day, has recently ridiculed me for climbing only 5.9. Actually, that is from a single occasion that really should be maybe, oh, let's say 5.86 or so, since it was only as second. To continue to be truthful, however, the belayer is a master climber in our area, and he did assure me, he being a supportive person, that I was climbing on that occasion at 5.9 level. I have no expectation of doing so again, so treasure that one incident as not an accident, even if unique.

Raising in my mind, more than once noted here as insane, a general question to this lovely and helpful community about what it takes to be considered by this lovely and helpful community "a real climber". Is it only difficulty level, or also time in the effort, and if so, how does that scale? Does a decade at 5.7 qualify? Does it have to include trad? Is it adjusted for number of attempts per year? Would how long, or number of climbs, it took to lead a 5.10 be a factor? What about indoors or outdoors? Type of rock? Does top-rope ever count? Perhaps the assessor's self-assessment is part of the judgment?

LL

Raising in my mind, more than once noted here as insane, a general question to this lovely and helpful community about what it takes to be considered by this lovely and helpful community "a real climber".

what it takes to be considered by this lovely and helpful community "a real climber"

Raising in my mind, more than once noted here as insane, a general question to this lovely and helpful community about what it takes to be considered by this lovely and helpful community "a real climber"...

I'd say climbing harder than 5.9 is the only requirement.

Sorry dude.

I keep it simple: all people can be divided into people who climb and climbers. People who have never climbed are one or the other, but have not yet been sorted.

For me, climbers are not defined by type of climbing they do, how hard, how frequently, how many years, how many posts they have, etc. It is purely attitude. You don't have to explain Why - they get it. I believe that there are climbers who have never had the chance to climb - but if you tell them about it, they get it. You can see it in the eyes of a climber when they talk about climbing...

Similarly, there are climbers who no longer climb (due to injury, life circumstances, etc.). They get it. And I hope to see them out again soon...

People who climb are everyone else. This includes people who have never climbed and never want to, those who have tried it (scout trip, birthday party, etc.) but don't get Why, those who do it for someone else (e.g., significant other of a climber who just goes along), those who want others to think of them as adventurous and climb to 'prove' it, etc.

I admit that I am unsure about some people who may never climb, but have the attitude - be they skiiers, golfers, chess players...Perhaps it's more about having a 'passion' than the actual activity...Well, I'm sure you can make it more complicated, but this suits my purposes. :)

Of course, I don't judge people's worth based on the above - it's just an interesting way to look at people. And it doesn't mean that climbers should only climb with climbers - given personality differences, some climbers may not make good partners - in some cases, a given person who climbs might make a better partner for a climber. Simple, eh?

Finally, unfortunately, it's easier to judge others than oneself: I find it most difficult to figure out where I fit in. Well, I won't spend much time thinking about it - I'd rather just go climbing.

PS - don't ask me to define the Why part...if you have to ask, well, that might tell you something. :)

I once gave a shit. Now I don't. If you enjoy climbing you are a climber. If you don't, stop climbing.

I once gave a shit. Now I don't. If you enjoy climbing you are a climber. If you don't, stop climbing.

I'd say climbing harder than 5.9 is the only requirement.

Sorry dude.

This.

/thread

A climber is someone who makes it up a climb safely, and returns to do it again another day. That said, one should be honest about accomplishments. People tend to embellish quite a bit - just ask anyone who met a number of partners online.

Undoubtedly, you show up to the cliff only to find your new partner really won't "follow anything you can lead up", has amazingly just come back from an injury and is only comfortable leading 5.5 when they claim .11b onsight level, or hasn't climbed in a while, so their "lead head" isn't working properly and is only comfortable leading 5.5...

...at least these are the excuses I use.

This.

/thread

The real climber iz the one hazing the most fun.