|
|
|
|
jacques
Apr 6, 2011, 8:22 PM
Post #26 of 67
(5169 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
justroberto wrote: [First, I didn't say anything about FOTH or its definition of fall factors. My contention is that if you think that in the field, mid-climb, you are remotely capable of analyzing and accurately calculating fall factors, potential forces on gear, and at what force you can expect your gear to fail in any given fall, then you're living in a complete fantasy land.
I am able to do that kind of analysis or scanning. I can evaluate it with the elongation of the rope on rp's because I did aid climbing and fall on my pro voluntarly. That need a lot of practice and the standard error his big (plus or minus three, five or six feet). Best climber are not those who can describe it scientificaly. Some guide follow the fall factor mathematically because they learned it from climber who climb before us. The emotional part is on how I can trust my analysis. When you succeed, you are not climbing a route, it is pure fun.
As you can not do the analysis or scanning. I am sorry for you. It is useless to talk about a definition that you can not understand. I just feel sorry that some of us, who talk about scanning and emotional part of trad climbing can not bring there opinion because of your ignorance. It is not fun to be humiliate like that and you probably do the same with your fellow sport climber.
Is it to bring the climber in a children garden where nobody can be hurt. Or is it just because you never thought about it. I don't know.
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Apr 6, 2011, 9:12 PM
Post #27 of 67
(5157 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
jt512 wrote: JimTitt wrote: Trad=Moveable protection Sport=Fixed Protection Seems enough for most of us. Jim I don't know. Did you spend at least an hour thinking about Jacque's post before writing like you were asked to? Jay
Took me best part of a day to work out what he was on about.
And the post between us is breathtaking in its complexity, you have all day to work it out and IŽll read your analysis when I wake in the morning!
Jim
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 6, 2011, 9:43 PM
Post #28 of 67
(5146 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
JimTitt wrote: jt512 wrote: JimTitt wrote: Trad=Moveable protection Sport=Fixed Protection Seems enough for most of us. Jim I don't know. Did you spend at least an hour thinking about Jacque's post before writing like you were asked to? Jay Took me best part of a day to work out what he was on about. And the post between us is breathtaking in its complexity, you have all day to work it out and IŽll read your analysis when I wake in the morning! Jim Jim
I'll run that post through my inverse Enigma(FrenchCanadian()) function, and let you know what I get. Computer time is proportional to the square of the post complexity, so I may not have a solution immediately.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Apr 6, 2011, 9:53 PM
Post #29 of 67
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
JimTitt wrote: Trad=Moveable protection Sport=Fixed Protection Seems enough for most of us. Jim
|
|
|
|
|
robdotcalm
Apr 6, 2011, 10:14 PM
Post #30 of 67
(5139 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027
|
JimTitt wrote: Trad=Moveable protection Sport=Fixed Protection Seems enough for most of us. Jim
I was climbing a sport route, which at my ability level seemed runout between bolts. I had carried up some small gear, which I was able to wiggle in between the spread out bolts and felt good about it. However, a young climber said that I had cheated by adding the extra gear. Oh, well.
rob.calm
|
|
|
|
|
robdotcalm
Apr 6, 2011, 10:16 PM
Post #31 of 67
(5137 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027
|
jt512 wrote: I don't know. Did you spend at least an hour thinking about Jacque's post before writing like you were asked to? Jay
rob.calm
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Apr 6, 2011, 11:08 PM
Post #32 of 67
(5128 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 8599
|
jt512 wrote: JimTitt wrote: Trad=Moveable protection Sport=Fixed Protection Seems enough for most of us. Jim I don't know. Did you spend at least an hour thinking about Jacque's post before writing like you were asked to? Jay
I didn't, and now I've got a stomach cramp.
|
|
|
|
|
justroberto
Apr 7, 2011, 12:22 AM
Post #33 of 67
(5109 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 21, 2006
Posts: 1876
|
robdotcalm wrote: JimTitt wrote: Trad=Moveable protection Sport=Fixed Protection Seems enough for most of us. Jim Mostly, but not completely. You're climbing a multi-pitch trad route and you come to the crux--a 30 foot finger crack, which has 5 stuck stoppers jammed into it. It's still a trad route. I was climbing a sport route, which at my ability level seemed runout between bolts. I had carried up some small gear, which I was able to wiggle in between the spread out bolts and felt good about it. However, a young climber said that I had cheated by adding the extra gear. Oh, well. rob.calm
Ha! Cheater! 
|
|
|
|
|
bearbreeder
Apr 7, 2011, 1:29 AM
Post #34 of 67
(5104 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 1960
|
quite a few climbs in squishiland and skaha are designed for you to carry gear up for between the bolts
theres no real reason IMO to put a bolt next to a perfectly good crack if the protection is good
i think some people call these "mixed" climbs ... not to be confused with the ice/mixed term
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Apr 7, 2011, 2:14 AM
Post #35 of 67
(5094 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
bearbreeder wrote: quite a few climbs in squishiland and skaha are designed for you to carry gear up for between the bolts theres no real reason IMO to put a bolt next to a perfectly good crack if the protection is good i think some people call these "mixed" climbs ... not to be confused with the ice/mixed term
or aid/free
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Apr 7, 2011, 3:02 PM
Post #36 of 67
(5052 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
olderic wrote: [or aid/free
In quebec, a climber went on a route and place a big friend. You know, the one that you just put in the rock, as anybody can do. The 5.10 climber tryed a 5.7 move. He can not do it. so he rest on his pro.
That is aid climbing...ha! ha! ha!
The pro didn't hold and as the last piece was wrong too, he died.
sport/trad accident???
|
|
|
|
|
sp00ki
Apr 9, 2011, 7:30 PM
Post #37 of 67
(4997 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2009
Posts: 552
|
jacques wrote: justroberto wrote: [First, I didn't say anything about FOTH or its definition of fall factors. My contention is that if you think that in the field, mid-climb, you are remotely capable of analyzing and accurately calculating fall factors, potential forces on gear, and at what force you can expect your gear to fail in any given fall, then you're living in a complete fantasy land. I am able to do that kind of analysis or scanning. I can evaluate it with the elongation of the rope on rp's because I did aid climbing and fall on my pro voluntarly. That need a lot of practice and the standard error his big (plus or minus three, five or six feet). Best climber are not those who can describe it scientificaly. Some guide follow the fall factor mathematically because they learned it from climber who climb before us. The emotional part is on how I can trust my analysis. When you succeed, you are not climbing a route, it is pure fun. As you can not do the analysis or scanning. I am sorry for you. It is useless to talk about a definition that you can not understand. I just feel sorry that some of us, who talk about scanning and emotional part of trad climbing can not bring there opinion because of your ignorance. It is not fun to be humiliate like that and you probably do the same with your fellow sport climber. Is it to bring the climber in a children garden where nobody can be hurt. Or is it just because you never thought about it. I don't know.
I know it's not your fault, but you should probably know:
Your posts are nearly impossible to comprehend.
(This post was edited by sp00ki on Apr 9, 2011, 7:31 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 9, 2011, 9:55 PM
Post #38 of 67
(4978 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
sp00ki wrote: jacques wrote: justroberto wrote: [First, I didn't say anything about FOTH or its definition of fall factors. My contention is that if you think that in the field, mid-climb, you are remotely capable of analyzing and accurately calculating fall factors, potential forces on gear, and at what force you can expect your gear to fail in any given fall, then you're living in a complete fantasy land. I am able to do that kind of analysis or scanning. I can evaluate it with the elongation of the rope on rp's because I did aid climbing and fall on my pro voluntarly. That need a lot of practice and the standard error his big (plus or minus three, five or six feet). Best climber are not those who can describe it scientificaly. Some guide follow the fall factor mathematically because they learned it from climber who climb before us. The emotional part is on how I can trust my analysis. When you succeed, you are not climbing a route, it is pure fun. As you can not do the analysis or scanning. I am sorry for you. It is useless to talk about a definition that you can not understand. I just feel sorry that some of us, who talk about scanning and emotional part of trad climbing can not bring there opinion because of your ignorance. It is not fun to be humiliate like that and you probably do the same with your fellow sport climber. Is it to bring the climber in a children garden where nobody can be hurt. Or is it just because you never thought about it. I don't know. I know it's not your fault, but you should probably know: Your posts are nearly impossible to comprehend.
I agree with everything after the comma in your post.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Apr 10, 2011, 6:43 AM
Post #39 of 67
(4952 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
sp00ki wrote: I know it's not your fault, but you should probably know: Your posts are nearly impossible to comprehend.
What do you mean by `nearlyŽ in this context?
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
OCD
Apr 10, 2011, 8:34 AM
Post #40 of 67
(4945 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2010
Posts: 45
|
I think what Jaques wants to hear is you are so coool because u are a trad climber, and all sport climbers are so lame (and boulders, and any body that climbs in any other way) and you are better than us, and your name is cooler, and all the boys will like u for what you do and not who you are. I am sick of all the people who think what they do is better than everybody else. Just go climb, and dont think about it so much.....LAME
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Apr 10, 2011, 10:49 AM
Post #41 of 67
(4942 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
Your decision making only seems to apply to first ascents. You keep referring to "go look" as if to imply that you're going to go look if it's possible to continue. But unless it's a first ascent you already know it's possible, just not if you can do it. That part isn't any different than sport climbing, the difference is whether or not the pro options exist and the fall will be safe. But again, if it's not a first ascent, you probably know the safety rating as well.
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Apr 10, 2011, 12:22 PM
Post #42 of 67
(4934 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
jacques wrote: justroberto wrote: [First, I didn't say anything about FOTH or its definition of fall factors. My contention is that if you think that in the field, mid-climb, you are remotely capable of analyzing and accurately calculating fall factors, potential forces on gear, and at what force you can expect your gear to fail in any given fall, then you're living in a complete fantasy land. I am able to do that kind of analysis or scanning. I can evaluate it with the elongation of the rope on rp's because I did aid climbing and fall on my pro voluntarly. That need a lot of practice and the standard error his big (plus or minus three, five or six feet). Best climber are not those who can describe it scientificaly. Some guide follow the fall factor mathematically because they learned it from climber who climb before us. The emotional part is on how I can trust my analysis. When you succeed, you are not climbing a route, it is pure fun. As you can not do the analysis or scanning. I am sorry for you. It is useless to talk about a definition that you can not understand. I just feel sorry that some of us, who talk about scanning and emotional part of trad climbing can not bring there opinion because of your ignorance. It is not fun to be humiliate like that and you probably do the same with your fellow sport climber. Is it to bring the climber in a children garden where nobody can be hurt. Or is it just because you never thought about it. I don't know.
This is awesome! You're like a Parisan waiter.
|
|
|
|
|
ccassidy
Apr 11, 2011, 3:47 PM
Post #43 of 67
(4894 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 12, 2010
Posts: 8
|
OCD wrote: I think what Jaques wants to hear is you are so coool because u are a trad climber, and all sport climbers are so lame (and boulders, and any body that climbs in any other way) and you are better than us, and your name is cooler, and all the boys will like u for what you do and not who you are. I am sick of all the people who think what they do is better than everybody else. Just go climb, and dont think about it so much.....LAME
Agreed...Climbing is climbing..to each his own...I am a trad climber...have been since the 70's, hell there was not even such a thing as sport climbing then. More adventure I think, even if the route is well known you still have to find placements....make decisions...
Two roads diverged in a wood and I - I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference. Robert Frost
nuff said.....
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Apr 11, 2011, 4:12 PM
Post #44 of 67
(4889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
ccassidy wrote: OCD wrote: I think what Jaques wants to hear is you are so coool because u are a trad climber, and all sport climbers are so lame (and boulders, and any body that climbs in any other way) and you are better than us, and your name is cooler, and all the boys will like u for what you do and not who you are. I am sick of all the people who think what they do is better than everybody else. Just go climb, and dont think about it so much.....LAME Agreed...Climbing is climbing..to each his own...I am a trad climber...have been since the 70's, hell there was not even such a thing as sport climbing then. More adventure I think, even if the route is well known you still have to find placements....make decisions... Two roads diverged in a wood and I - I took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference. Robert Frost nuff said.....
So you think there is a smaller population of trad climbers now than there was in the 70's?
|
|
|
|
|
ccassidy
Apr 11, 2011, 10:00 PM
Post #45 of 67
(4862 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 12, 2010
Posts: 8
|
In reply to: In reply to: So you think there is a smaller population of trad climbers now than there was in the 70's? Numbers wise I am not sure as there are a lot more climbers now, we almost never saw anyone else. Percentage wise...definetly..because there was not anything else back then....trad climbers seem harder to find where I am in Colorado at least...I hear lots of guys go to the gym, ( I have never been there), or to areas like Rifle with terrific sport climbs.
|
|
|
|
|
healyje
Apr 11, 2011, 11:10 PM
Post #46 of 67
(4856 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4204
|
shockabuku wrote: So you think there is a smaller population of trad climbers now than there was in the 70's?
In the 70's trad climbers made up 100% of rock climbers. Today I would suspect less than 15% of humans who will put on a climbing harness this year will will lead or follow on gear.
|
|
|
|
|
csproul
Apr 12, 2011, 1:45 PM
Post #47 of 67
(4828 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769
|
healyje wrote: shockabuku wrote: So you think there is a smaller population of trad climbers now than there was in the 70's? In the 70's trad climbers made up 100% of rock climbers. Today I would suspect less than 15% of humans who will put on a climbing harness this year will will lead or follow on gear.
|
|
|
|
|
LostinMaine
Apr 12, 2011, 4:40 PM
Post #48 of 67
(4806 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 8, 2007
Posts: 539
|
csproul wrote: healyje wrote: shockabuku wrote: So you think there is a smaller population of trad climbers now than there was in the 70's? In the 70's trad climbers made up 100% of rock climbers. Today I would suspect less than 15% of humans who will put on a climbing harness this year will will lead or follow on gear. That's not what he asked. The % might be lower, but I'd be willing to bet there are far more trad climbers now than there were in the 70's.
But that was addressed 2 posts up thread from yours.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Apr 12, 2011, 4:44 PM
Post #49 of 67
(4802 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
Conversation above...it's not the road less traveled. You're just hero worshiping yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
ccassidy
Apr 12, 2011, 4:45 PM
Post #50 of 67
(4800 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 12, 2010
Posts: 8
|
In reply to: In the 70's trad climbers made up 100% of rock climbers. Today I would suspect less than 15% of humans who will put on a climbing harness this year will will lead or follow on gear. In reply to: That's not what he asked. The % might be lower, but I'd be willing to bet there are far more trad climbers now than there were in the 70's
There are more trad climbers now due to the large increase in the total amount of climbers...but the percentage of trad climbers is very low. I bet 15% is pretty close for my area.
My daughter took a climbing class at college, all they covered was sport climbing; nothing on anything other than clipping into a bolt and belaying...kinda sad for me...
|
|
|
|
|
|
