Forums: Climbing Information: Regional Discussions:
Lichenness Stripped of Bolts
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Regional Discussions

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All


Claymsmith


Nov 26, 2011, 9:04 PM
Post #1 of 111 (9989 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 11, 2010
Posts: 9

Lichenness Stripped of Bolts  (North_America: United_States: Alabama: Northern: Sandrock__Cherokee_Rock_Village_)
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

This route has been stripped and the bolts ground off. This is pretty aggravating. It was a fun short route and not sure why someone would vandalize it. Does anyone know anything about it? I would love to get my hands on whoever did it.


jae8908


Nov 27, 2011, 3:30 PM
Post #2 of 111 (9897 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 15, 2011
Posts: 270

Re: [Claymsmith] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

What? that is crazy! that is a good short route!


johnwesely


Nov 27, 2011, 3:39 PM
Post #3 of 111 (9890 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [Claymsmith] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.


dudemanbu


Nov 27, 2011, 5:25 PM
Post #4 of 111 (9848 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 2, 2005
Posts: 941

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

Honestly, everything under 5.13b should really be chopped in that case, while we're throwing out arbitrary numbers, we might as well put the ceiling over the heads of most gym rats.


shockabuku


Nov 27, 2011, 5:28 PM
Post #5 of 111 (9846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4867

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

The rationale for that is not as clear to me as it apparently is to you. Perhaps you could explain.


johnwesely


Nov 27, 2011, 6:07 PM
Post #6 of 111 (9826 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [shockabuku] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

The rationale for that is not as clear to me as it apparently is to you. Perhaps you could explain.

There are a few reasons. Most sub 5.10 sport routes are not really any fun. There are a few that are, but by and large, the quality of sub 5.10 sport is pretty poor. They are usually short, low angle, or chossy. Once you get to 5.10, the quality goes up considerably, but really good 5.10 sport routes are not exactly common.

The other reason is crowds. Sub 5.10 sport routes are probably the key driver of crowding at the crags because the barrier to entry is so low. Crowds are bad for access. What is bad for access is bad for climbers.


shockabuku


Nov 27, 2011, 6:29 PM
Post #7 of 111 (9815 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4867

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

The rationale for that is not as clear to me as it apparently is to you. Perhaps you could explain.

There are a few reasons. Most sub 5.10 sport routes are not really any fun. There are a few that are, but by and large, the quality of sub 5.10 sport is pretty poor. They are usually short, low angle, or chossy. Once you get to 5.10, the quality goes up considerably, but really good 5.10 sport routes are not exactly common.

The other reason is crowds. Sub 5.10 sport routes are probably the key driver of crowding at the crags because the barrier to entry is so low. Crowds are bad for access. What is bad for access is bad for climbers.

Well, maybe, maybe not.

The Gunks see worse crowds than anywhere else I have ever climbed. I have yet to find a sub 5.10 sport route there.Unsure


johnwesely


Nov 27, 2011, 6:45 PM
Post #8 of 111 (9807 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [shockabuku] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

The rationale for that is not as clear to me as it apparently is to you. Perhaps you could explain.

There are a few reasons. Most sub 5.10 sport routes are not really any fun. There are a few that are, but by and large, the quality of sub 5.10 sport is pretty poor. They are usually short, low angle, or chossy. Once you get to 5.10, the quality goes up considerably, but really good 5.10 sport routes are not exactly common.

The other reason is crowds. Sub 5.10 sport routes are probably the key driver of crowding at the crags because the barrier to entry is so low. Crowds are bad for access. What is bad for access is bad for climbers.

Well, maybe, maybe not.

The Gunks see worse crowds than anywhere else I have ever climbed. I have yet to find a sub 5.10 sport route there.Unsure

Imagine the gunks if everything was rap bolted.


jt512


Nov 27, 2011, 8:34 PM
Post #9 of 111 (9760 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21893

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

The rationale for that is not as clear to me as it apparently is to you. Perhaps you could explain.

There are a few reasons. Most sub 5.10 sport routes are not really any fun. There are a few that are, but by and large, the quality of sub 5.10 sport is pretty poor. They are usually short, low angle, or chossy. Once you get to 5.10, the quality goes up considerably, but really good 5.10 sport routes are not exactly common.

The other reason is crowds. Sub 5.10 sport routes are probably the key driver of crowding at the crags because the barrier to entry is so low. Crowds are bad for access. What is bad for access is bad for climbers.

Well, maybe, maybe not.

The Gunks see worse crowds than anywhere else I have ever climbed. I have yet to find a sub 5.10 sport route there.Unsure

Imagine the gunks if everything was rap bolted.

Why just imagine?

Jay


johnwesely


Nov 28, 2011, 4:17 AM
Post #10 of 111 (9707 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [jt512] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

The rationale for that is not as clear to me as it apparently is to you. Perhaps you could explain.

There are a few reasons. Most sub 5.10 sport routes are not really any fun. There are a few that are, but by and large, the quality of sub 5.10 sport is pretty poor. They are usually short, low angle, or chossy. Once you get to 5.10, the quality goes up considerably, but really good 5.10 sport routes are not exactly common.

The other reason is crowds. Sub 5.10 sport routes are probably the key driver of crowding at the crags because the barrier to entry is so low. Crowds are bad for access. What is bad for access is bad for climbers.

Well, maybe, maybe not.

The Gunks see worse crowds than anywhere else I have ever climbed. I have yet to find a sub 5.10 sport route there.Unsure

Imagine the gunks if everything was rap bolted.

Why just imagine?

Jay

Because I would end up having to chop most of the routes afterwards.


sungam


Nov 28, 2011, 5:01 AM
Post #11 of 111 (9699 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26622

Re: [jt512] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

The rationale for that is not as clear to me as it apparently is to you. Perhaps you could explain.

There are a few reasons. Most sub 5.10 sport routes are not really any fun. There are a few that are, but by and large, the quality of sub 5.10 sport is pretty poor. They are usually short, low angle, or chossy. Once you get to 5.10, the quality goes up considerably, but really good 5.10 sport routes are not exactly common.

The other reason is crowds. Sub 5.10 sport routes are probably the key driver of crowding at the crags because the barrier to entry is so low. Crowds are bad for access. What is bad for access is bad for climbers.

Well, maybe, maybe not.

The Gunks see worse crowds than anywhere else I have ever climbed. I have yet to find a sub 5.10 sport route there.Unsure

Imagine the gunks if everything was rap bolted.

Why just imagine?

Jay
Oah. Mah. Gawd. There iz just some things you can't joke about, Jay. The Gunks is serious business. If the little kiddies see a adult joking about it maybe the wont get it and they will get the wrong idea and bolt the whole gunks. All of it, man. What if the bolted all of it before they realised you were just kidding?


6pacfershur


Nov 28, 2011, 9:54 AM
Post #12 of 111 (9620 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 22, 2010
Posts: 223

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
shockabuku wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.

The rationale for that is not as clear to me as it apparently is to you. Perhaps you could explain.

There are a few reasons. Most sub 5.10 sport routes are not really any fun. There are a few that are, but by and large, the quality of sub 5.10 sport is pretty poor. They are usually short, low angle, or chossy.

wow, sounds like your area sucks....


eRJe


Nov 28, 2011, 11:52 AM
Post #13 of 111 (9569 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 27, 2011
Posts: 11

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.
I wish I was born pulling in the 5.12-5.13 range so that I could rock climb too. O well, I guess I will have to settle for not being a d-bag on the internet.


pegsablaze


Nov 28, 2011, 11:56 AM
Post #14 of 111 (9566 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 24, 2011
Posts: 2

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Maybe you didn't learn to lead climb outside on 5.8s and 5.9s, but I sure did, and I know quite a few good, respectful people who have. Just because you take no pleasure in the sub 5.10 climbs doesn't make them useless. It just makes them the first step to leading comfortably outside.

Crowds, on the other hand, I agree with. Sandrock doesn't need anymore guided groups than it is already subjected to. However, they typically stick to Jaws Block with its accessibility to easily set topropes.

And if worse comes to worst, you could always give the groups a show as you send their toprope on lead!


johnwesely


Nov 28, 2011, 11:57 AM
Post #15 of 111 (9564 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [eRJe] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

eRJe wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.
I wish I was born pulling in the 5.12-5.13 range so that I could rock climb too. O well, I guess I will have to settle for not being a d-bag on the internet.

You don't have to climb 5.12 or .13, just 5.10. If you climb trad, you can climb anything you want.


eRJe


Nov 28, 2011, 1:36 PM
Post #16 of 111 (9534 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 27, 2011
Posts: 11

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
eRJe wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I didn't do it, but I don't think it is such a bad idea. Climbing would be much better off if all the sport routes, sans the classics, under 5.10 or maybe 5.11 were chopped.
I wish I was born pulling in the 5.12-5.13 range so that I could rock climb too. O well, I guess I will have to settle for not being a d-bag on the internet.

You don't have to climb 5.12 or .13, just 5.10. If you climb trad, you can climb anything you want.
Hey. I've got another great idea on how we can make rock climbing really inaccessible to beginners to make sure we never have to share all that lovely rock tha is NOT OUR. Let's make a website and pretend to offer help, but when gumbys ask us any questions we can just flame them, tell them they are going to die and let them know that they are generally not welcomed at "our" crags. O wait. Rc.com beat us to it.

It would really be nice if you were to remember back when you started climbing. Someone went out of their way to help you learn. Someone bolted beginner routes you could climb. And someone actually encouraged you to climb. Try paying the favour forward.


Partner j_ung


Nov 28, 2011, 1:50 PM
Post #17 of 111 (9526 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18689

Re: [eRJe] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

eRJe wrote:
It would really be nice if you were to remember back when you started climbing. Someone went out of their way to help you learn. Someone bolted beginner routes you could climb. And someone actually encouraged you to climb. Try paying the favour forward.

That's not necessarily true of every climber. While I don't agree with johnwesely that we should run around chopping every sport route under 10 or 11, I wholeheartedly agree that, in most American cases anyway, moderate sport climbs eventually equal overcrowding. I'd love it if people bolting moderate routes thought about things like parking and the opinions of land managers before doing so.

To be fair, I've bolted a couple moderate sport climbs in my day (but only in places that can handle the traffic) and I've taken beginners to crags with moderate sport climbs that probably can handle the eventual crags.

Again, I'm not advocating the removal of all such routes, just some forethought on the parts of developers.


eRJe


Nov 28, 2011, 1:58 PM
Post #18 of 111 (9520 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 27, 2011
Posts: 11

Re: [j_ung] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

Fair point. I just get sick of coming to RC.com and every second post is about how noobs are ruining the world and should all fuck off and die. There are a lot of things to consider when setting new routes. A lot of responsibilities that many most climbers would not think of. At the same time we were all beginners once I think it would serve some people well to remember that.


johnwesely


Nov 28, 2011, 2:20 PM
Post #19 of 111 (9506 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [eRJe] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

eRJe wrote:
Fair point. I just get sick of coming to RC.com and every second post is about how noobs are ruining the world and should all fuck off and die. There are a lot of things to consider when setting new routes. A lot of responsibilities that many most climbers would not think of. At the same time we were all beginners once I think it would serve some people well to remember that.

I was never a beginner.


petsfed


Nov 28, 2011, 2:32 PM
Post #20 of 111 (9493 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 8595

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
The other reason is crowds. Sub 5.10 sport routes are probably the key driver of crowding at the crags because the barrier to entry is so low. Crowds are bad for access. What is bad for access is bad for climbers.

Well, if you think crowds are bad for climbers, you should probably start by dissuading the one climber you yourself are guaranteed to influence.

You don't like crowds, wanna spread impact so we don't get the place closed? Start by not going yourself.

If all it took to protect an area from uninformed jackasses ruining it for the rest of us is just not telling them about it, the world would truly be a better place. But I've seen what just-shut-up-already as a managment solution does to places. We will lose free camping in Ten Sleep, probably within the next 2 years, because of it. We got a hideous parking lot in Indian Creek because of it.

Its like teen pregnancy. By just telling folks not to go (but not, you know, how to act if they still go) we compound the issue.


johnwesely


Nov 28, 2011, 3:00 PM
Post #21 of 111 (9485 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [petsfed] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

petsfed wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
The other reason is crowds. Sub 5.10 sport routes are probably the key driver of crowding at the crags because the barrier to entry is so low. Crowds are bad for access. What is bad for access is bad for climbers.

Well, if you think crowds are bad for climbers, you should probably start by dissuading the one climber you yourself are guaranteed to influence.

You don't like crowds, wanna spread impact so we don't get the place closed? Start by not going yourself.

If all it took to protect an area from uninformed jackasses ruining it for the rest of us is just not telling them about it, the world would truly be a better place. But I've seen what just-shut-up-already as a managment solution does to places. We will lose free camping in Ten Sleep, probably within the next 2 years, because of it. We got a hideous parking lot in Indian Creek because of it.

Its like teen pregnancy. By just telling folks not to go (but not, you know, how to act if they still go) we compound the issue.

I am not telling people not to go. Everyone has just as much right as everyone else if the land is public. I just think the barrier to entry should be higher than 5.8 sport.


petsfed


Nov 28, 2011, 3:25 PM
Post #22 of 111 (9468 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 8595

Re: [johnwesely] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

And I'm saying that there is no acceptable minimum grade for outdoor climbing that isn't ripped, potentially uncomfortably so, from the speaker's own ass.

I agree, a 5.4 sport route is probably a waste of bolts. That doesn't mean that they should be explicitly prohibited, either officially or by the community at large. If we just say "all routes must be 5.9 (for instance) to deserve bolts", then two things will happen: a lot of otherwise good (not great, or classic, but good) routes will get put up at 5.8 or under that are straight up death routes for anyone trying to break into that grade AND you'll see pretty serious grade creep as more 5.8, 5.7, even 5.6 routes get called 5.9 just to fit this arbitrary cutoff.

If you develop routes and are concerned about crowding, then don't develop a crag that will have that problem, at all. Don't put in the bolts for harder projects, don't put in the bolts for warmups. Don't develop the crag period.

You're arguing for a universe where climbers who can't onsite at a certain level don't count. My claim is that whatever the cutoff, it will be arbitrary, needlessly elitist, and counterproductive.


sp115


Nov 28, 2011, 3:50 PM
Post #23 of 111 (9453 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 17, 2007
Posts: 515

Re: [petsfed] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

petsfed wrote:
And I'm saying that there is no acceptable minimum grade for outdoor climbing that isn't ripped, potentially uncomfortably so, from the speaker's own ass.

I agree, a 5.4 sport route is probably a waste of bolts. That doesn't mean that they should be explicitly prohibited, either officially or by the community at large. If we just say "all routes must be 5.9 (for instance) to deserve bolts", then two things will happen: a lot of otherwise good (not great, or classic, but good) routes will get put up at 5.8 or under that are straight up death routes for anyone trying to break into that grade AND you'll see pretty serious grade creep as more 5.8, 5.7, even 5.6 routes get called 5.9 just to fit this arbitrary cutoff.

If you develop routes and are concerned about crowding, then don't develop a crag that will have that problem, at all. Don't put in the bolts for harder projects, don't put in the bolts for warmups. Don't develop the crag period.

You're arguing for a universe where climbers who can't onsite at a certain level don't count. My claim is that whatever the cutoff, it will be arbitrary, needlessly elitist, and counterproductive.

On behalf of all the fish in the barrel, I'm formally asking Johnwesely to put away his gun.


(This post was edited by sp115 on Nov 28, 2011, 3:52 PM)


sungam


Nov 28, 2011, 4:02 PM
Post #24 of 111 (9447 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26622

Re: [sp115] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Nah, it's more funny this way.


johnwesely


Nov 28, 2011, 4:17 PM
Post #25 of 111 (9435 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5343

Re: [sp115] Lichenness Stripped of Bolts [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

sp115 wrote:
petsfed wrote:
And I'm saying that there is no acceptable minimum grade for outdoor climbing that isn't ripped, potentially uncomfortably so, from the speaker's own ass.

I agree, a 5.4 sport route is probably a waste of bolts. That doesn't mean that they should be explicitly prohibited, either officially or by the community at large. If we just say "all routes must be 5.9 (for instance) to deserve bolts", then two things will happen: a lot of otherwise good (not great, or classic, but good) routes will get put up at 5.8 or under that are straight up death routes for anyone trying to break into that grade AND you'll see pretty serious grade creep as more 5.8, 5.7, even 5.6 routes get called 5.9 just to fit this arbitrary cutoff.

If you develop routes and are concerned about crowding, then don't develop a crag that will have that problem, at all. Don't put in the bolts for harder projects, don't put in the bolts for warmups. Don't develop the crag period.

You're arguing for a universe where climbers who can't onsite at a certain level don't count. My claim is that whatever the cutoff, it will be arbitrary, needlessly elitist, and counterproductive.

On behalf of all the fish in the barrel, I'm formally asking Johnwesely to put away his gun.

Just because the fish are easy, does not mean you can take away my right to shoot them.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 5 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : Regional Discussions

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook