Forums: Climbing Disciplines: Bouldering:
System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Bouldering

Premier Sponsor:

 


flesh


Jun 8, 2011, 4:49 PM
Post #1 of 18 (4216 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 418

System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I've been thinking about this for awhile, grades are a rough estimate but very arbitrary, so I've been giving personal ratings to things I do outside. Generally, I down grade things but not always.

I've come up with a simple formula that seems to work for me I'd like to share for discussion and to be flamed.

It only works starting at V4 IMO.

You break a boulder problem down into two sections, rate each of those two sections, then add 4 and divide by two.

The two sections can be just one move thats say v5 or it can be two sections that are a comination of moves.

So if you do v4 into v4 it goes like this, 4 + 4 + 4 / 2= v6

Or

v10 into v8, 10 + 8+ 4 / 2= v11

v6 into v8, 8 + 6 + 4/2= v9

Anyways, I was surprised that I found it to be very accurate when I applied it to boulder problems I've already done, almost perfect.

v14 into v14, 14 plus 14 plus 4 /2=v16


ceebo


Jun 9, 2011, 7:51 AM
Post #2 of 18 (4165 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [flesh] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

flesh wrote:
I've been thinking about this for awhile, grades are a rough estimate but very arbitrary, so I've been giving personal ratings to things I do outside. Generally, I down grade things but not always.

I've come up with a simple formula that seems to work for me I'd like to share for discussion and to be flamed.

It only works starting at V4 IMO.

You break a boulder problem down into two sections, rate each of those two sections, then add 4 and divide by two.

The two sections can be just one move thats say v5 or it can be two sections that are a comination of moves.

So if you do v4 into v4 it goes like this, 4 + 4 + 4 / 2= v6

Or

v10 into v8, 10 + 8+ 4 / 2= v11

v6 into v8, 8 + 6 + 4/2= v9

Anyways, I was surprised that I found it to be very accurate when I applied it to boulder problems I've already done, almost perfect.

v14 into v14, 14 plus 14 plus 4 /2=v16

Something that pisses me off about the whole grade system (including this im afraid ;p) is that height has no baring on how hard/easy it makes a move when it clearly does.

In an ideal world this would also be broken down into 2 more sub sections that of ''small move'' and ''big move''. Then by getting the AVG height of a climber (lets say 5.9?) work out if a formula to accurately grade something to him. From that you can easily draw other conclusions as to the true grade for people of other heights.

With ought question their are some routes ive been on where my height felt perfect (one comes to mind as a f7a) where as for my old partner who was much taller im sure the crunched up moves made it at least a 7a+ for him. Also the latest route i done was 7c or so, the crux move was a series of slap ups to get to a sweat spot. He could do it in 2 slaps where i had to do it in 3. Given the fact this was max limit climbing that 1 extra slap up felt like it pushed the grade to me. In that 1 move alone it felt like i had to give 20% more than he did.

Edit: i forgot about that ape index thing or what not, but that is simply a case of factoring in the + or - after the math of a neutral person?.

For example a guy of neutral ape and 5''9 would be similar to a guy of 5''8 and +1? perhaps. In terms of a stretchy v4 feeling like a stretchy 4v to both. Where as to a guy of 5'2 neutral it would feel like a dyno v5?.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Jun 9, 2011, 8:07 AM)


banketh


Jun 9, 2011, 8:45 AM
Post #3 of 18 (4155 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 21, 2008
Posts: 9

Re: [ceebo] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

If height makes everything easier, how come some of the strongest climbers in the world are under 5'10"?

you can't be serious when you suggest different ratings for height, ape index etc. ratings are a guideline not a definitive answer


ceebo


Jun 9, 2011, 9:09 AM
Post #4 of 18 (4149 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [banketh] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

banketh wrote:
If height makes everything easier, how come some of the strongest climbers in the world are under 5'10"?

you can't be serious when you suggest different ratings for height, ape index etc. ratings are a guideline not a definitive answer

At what point did i say being tall makes it easier?.. you clearly missed the point.

and if you did not realise height effects moves by now then you never will.


esander4


Jun 9, 2011, 9:27 AM
Post #5 of 18 (4144 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 7, 2010
Posts: 245

Re: [ceebo] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
banketh wrote:
If height makes everything easier, how come some of the strongest climbers in the world are under 5'10"?

you can't be serious when you suggest different ratings for height, ape index etc. ratings are a guideline not a definitive answer

At what point did i say being tall makes it easier?.. you clearly missed the point.

and if you did not realise height effects moves by now then you never will.

Well of course height affects the difficulty of the climb, but i don't think it should reflect in the rating. Ratings are subjective in themselves, giving handicaps would only make things more confusing. There are some V2s I can't do because the moves are pretty short person oriented, but some V6's and 7s that feel like 2's or 3's because of my height. But that doesn't mean the rating should go up or down based on the fact I have a longer reach.

In basketball, height makes a lot of difference also. Look at Wes Unsled. He was one of the shortest centers in NBA history at only 6'6" but he still led the league in rebounding and was an MVP. But he didn't get "extra" rebounds for being a lot shorter than most other centers. Tall and short people just need to develop different skill sets to make problems easier


(This post was edited by esander4 on Jun 9, 2011, 9:36 AM)


jbone


Jun 9, 2011, 9:28 AM
Post #6 of 18 (4144 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2002
Posts: 461

Re: [flesh] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Serious question..

Have you ever been to Hueco Tanks? I ask because if you are truly trying to fathom the "Verm" system of grading boulder problems this is a mandatory requirement.

Also when you climb in Hueco and you see the incredible variations of the problems as relative to their grades you will know once and forever that the "Verm" system of grading boulder problems is purely subjective.

When you blanket grade problems with this or any particular system you must always realize that your results are completely relative to you being the climber and no one else.

Not that I expect you to relate but the #1 lesson I learned during my stint at Hueco was all true boulder problems are V4, and that anything you can lap on is V4-, everything harder than that is V4+. To understand this you must live it.

Remember that guy John Sherman aka "The Verm"? He told me once that originally V3 was anything Todd Skinner wasn't able to climb. Now that's one hell of a system.


flesh


Jun 9, 2011, 10:44 AM
Post #7 of 18 (4123 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 418

Re: [jbone] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I think everyone of you did not read the title clearly.

This is a system for giving "personal ratings for boulder problems or first ascents"

A personal rating is, personal. I could care less about given grades. For example, I just did a boulder problem that was 1 of the two hardest i've ever done, but when people ask me how hard it is, I say its one grade easier than what it's rated because it doesn't feel as hard as it's rated to me. And using this system, I found it to be one grade easier than the given grade.

I just thought it was a neat system. And when I apply it to the boulders I've done, it works accurately. Try using it on the boulders you've done.

Remember, when breaking it into two sections, one of the sections can be a little as one move.

I haven't been to hueco yet, but I've been to a dozen differnt areas around the country that use the v-scale...... also I've bouldered with john (what a character) at ibex, utah.


If you don't like the v scale just use the font scale, it works with the system too. The conversion starting at about v7=7a+ seems to be accurate based on my three trips to font.

8a into 8a = 11 plus 11 plus 4/2= 8b


jbone


Jun 9, 2011, 11:00 AM
Post #8 of 18 (4117 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2002
Posts: 461

Re: [flesh] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Your establishing the fact that these grades are personal yet you bring up when someone asks how hard it is you tell them its V-whatever.

If your establishing a personal rating then why use the "V" system. Shouldn't you be using a "Flesh" or "F" rating system? At least a system that would not be so easily confused with the "V" system that so many of us already are familiar with.


flesh


Jun 9, 2011, 11:04 AM
Post #9 of 18 (4112 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 418

Re: [jbone] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jbone wrote:
Your establishing the fact that these grades are personal yet you bring up when someone asks how hard it is you tell them its V-whatever.

If your establishing a personal rating then why use the "V" system. Shouldn't you be using a "Flesh" or "F" rating system? At least a system that would not be so easily confused with the "V" system that so many of us already are familiar with.

Jbone, I'm not spraying to people about the grades Im climbing, but when someone I know hears about something I've climbed and they ask me I don't feel like it would make sense to them to tell them it's f-something, they wouldn't know what that means broseph Tongue. Not without a long drawn out explanation anyway.

Back on topic, I'm interested to see if when you folks apply this system to the boulder problems you've done if it's accurate or not.


jbone


Jun 9, 2011, 11:17 AM
Post #10 of 18 (4109 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2002
Posts: 461

Re: [flesh] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Your process works better for boulder problems that climb more like routes, where you can take it and break it up into a series of smaller moves.

The best representation of a grade is when its distilled down to 1 move. Like "Power of Silence" on North Mtn is considered V10 because of 1 move, the pinch. if you can stick the pinch strong their is no reason any other move on that problem will give you problems. Even if your 5' tall.

Or Daily Dick Dose where you either do the move and send or you don't.

If you said to me "oh its like V7" I'd be like "Like which V7?" Babyface or Daily Dick Dose?


(This post was edited by jbone on Jun 9, 2011, 11:20 AM)


flesh


Jun 10, 2011, 10:18 AM
Post #11 of 18 (4042 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 418

Re: [jbone] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jbone wrote:
Your process works better for boulder problems that climb more like routes, where you can take it and break it up into a series of smaller moves.

The best representation of a grade is when its distilled down to 1 move. Like "Power of Silence" on North Mtn is considered V10 because of 1 move, the pinch. if you can stick the pinch strong their is no reason any other move on that problem will give you problems. Even if your 5' tall.

Or Daily Dick Dose where you either do the move and send or you don't.

If you said to me "oh its like V7" I'd be like "Like which V7?" Babyface or Daily Dick Dose?

True, it doesn't work on one move wonders. Distilling it down to one move is another accurate way it seems. But one move wonders represent a small percentage at least of what I've climbed or can think of.

So you've got the one move rating system and this one for problems that clearly have more than one hard move.


pyrosis


Jun 12, 2011, 8:00 PM
Post #12 of 18 (3973 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 1, 2004
Posts: 150

Re: [flesh] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

flesh wrote:
I've come up with a simple formula that seems to work for me I'd like to share for discussion and to be flamed.

Either your name is Max Zolotukhin, or you are a plagiarist.

posted 11/16/09:

http://climbingczar.lt11.com/.../11/16/the-equation/

Linked to from Paul Robinson's blog 5/5/11:

http://p-d-robinson.tumblr.com/...-cents#disqus_thread


MS1


Jun 13, 2011, 9:10 AM
Post #13 of 18 (3930 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 24, 2009
Posts: 560

Re: [pyrosis] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

pyrosis wrote:
flesh wrote:
I've come up with a simple formula that seems to work for me I'd like to share for discussion and to be flamed.

Either your name is Max Zolotukhin, or you are a plagiarist.

posted 11/16/09:

http://climbingczar.lt11.com/.../11/16/the-equation/

Linked to from Paul Robinson's blog 5/5/11:

http://p-d-robinson.tumblr.com/...-cents#disqus_thread

It's not necessarily plagiarism. It could be independent invention without knowledge of the other's work, like Newton/Leibniz.


pyrosis


Jun 13, 2011, 11:43 AM
Post #14 of 18 (3906 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 1, 2004
Posts: 150

Re: [MS1] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

MS1 wrote:

It's not necessarily plagiarism. It could be independent invention without knowledge of the other's work, like Newton/Leibniz.


Actually, you are right. I take it back. Someone had even said it before Zolotukhin, who also didn't seem to realize that it was not an original thought.


curt


Jun 13, 2011, 9:28 PM
Post #15 of 18 (3854 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 26, 2002
Posts: 18230

Re: [jbone] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jbone wrote:
Remember that guy John Sherman aka "The Verm"? He told me once that originally V3 was anything Todd Skinner wasn't able to climb. Now that's one hell of a system.

Actually, that speaks volumes about Sherman--not so much about Todd.

Curt


sp00ki


Jun 14, 2011, 10:06 AM
Post #16 of 18 (3810 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 2, 2009
Posts: 552

Re: [ceebo] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
flesh wrote:
I've been thinking about this for awhile, grades are a rough estimate but very arbitrary, so I've been giving personal ratings to things I do outside. Generally, I down grade things but not always.

I've come up with a simple formula that seems to work for me I'd like to share for discussion and to be flamed.

It only works starting at V4 IMO.

You break a boulder problem down into two sections, rate each of those two sections, then add 4 and divide by two.

The two sections can be just one move thats say v5 or it can be two sections that are a comination of moves.

So if you do v4 into v4 it goes like this, 4 + 4 + 4 / 2= v6

Or

v10 into v8, 10 + 8+ 4 / 2= v11

v6 into v8, 8 + 6 + 4/2= v9

Anyways, I was surprised that I found it to be very accurate when I applied it to boulder problems I've already done, almost perfect.

v14 into v14, 14 plus 14 plus 4 /2=v16

Something that pisses me off about the whole grade system (including this im afraid ;p) is that height has no baring on how hard/easy it makes a move when it clearly does.

In an ideal world this would also be broken down into 2 more sub sections that of ''small move'' and ''big move''. Then by getting the AVG height of a climber (lets say 5.9?) work out if a formula to accurately grade something to him. From that you can easily draw other conclusions as to the true grade for people of other heights.

With ought question their are some routes ive been on where my height felt perfect (one comes to mind as a f7a) where as for my old partner who was much taller im sure the crunched up moves made it at least a 7a+ for him. Also the latest route i done was 7c or so, the crux move was a series of slap ups to get to a sweat spot. He could do it in 2 slaps where i had to do it in 3. Given the fact this was max limit climbing that 1 extra slap up felt like it pushed the grade to me. In that 1 move alone it felt like i had to give 20% more than he did.

Edit: i forgot about that ape index thing or what not, but that is simply a case of factoring in the + or - after the math of a neutral person?.

For example a guy of neutral ape and 5''9 would be similar to a guy of 5''8 and +1? perhaps. In terms of a stretchy v4 feeling like a stretchy 4v to both. Where as to a guy of 5'2 neutral it would feel like a dyno v5?.
http://8a.nu/...p;CountryCode=GLOBAL


(This post was edited by sp00ki on Jun 14, 2011, 10:07 AM)


healyje


Jun 14, 2011, 12:38 PM
Post #17 of 18 (3780 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2004
Posts: 4199

Re: [flesh] System for giving personal ratings for boulder problems. Or first ascents [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

It's not rocket science:

(((height in inches * age) / no. of attempts) - number of illegal substances involved - number. of fights with girlfriend in past week)


sp00ki


Jun 15, 2011, 3:24 PM
Post #18 of 18 (3713 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 2, 2009
Posts: 552

Post deleted by sp00ki [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  

 


Forums : Climbing Disciplines : Bouldering

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook