|
furryfrisbee
Nov 25, 2003, 3:07 PM
Post #1 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 260
|
I was checking this website (http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/4789/index1.html) for new routes listed at Sandrock that might not be in the "Dixie Craggers Atlas". Under the "new routes" listing they have "Windows" as a 5.10c. It's listed as a 5.9 in the route database here, and the "Dixie Craggers Atlas" lists "First Black in Space" (aka:"Windows") as a 5.8.
So am I suddenly a 5.10 climber? How did I get to be a 5.10 climber without realizing it? If I wait long enough will I get to be a 5.12 climber, or is this another example of the dumbing down of America?
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Nov 25, 2003, 3:13 PM
Post #2 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
I recall the climb... did it about 2 years ago. Didn't feel 5.10 at the time.
Has anything changed? Holds break off, small edges get polished so much they become unusable (or much harder to use,) etc.
There's a route on Hallet's Peak in RMNP like this (Northcutt-Carter on the 3rd Buttress) ... it was a 5.7, but a section of rock fell, bumping the grade to 5.10-ish.
Then too, it might be a blatant case of sandbagging or poor information on the part of the website.
I never did like Sandrock.
|
|
|
|
|
goldencrowbar
Nov 25, 2003, 3:30 PM
Post #3 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 8, 2003
Posts: 112
|
Did you TR it or lead it? Might make a difference
|
|
|
|
|
climbincajun
Nov 25, 2003, 3:46 PM
Post #4 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 6, 2002
Posts: 216
|
Though I remember the climb only vaguely, I can tell you with some certainty that it is not 5.10. I lead it more than once in my earlier days climbing, and it is definitely closer to a 5.8. I would also guess the the Dixie Cragger's Atlas is a more reliable source than any others you mention.
In reply to: Did you TR it or lead it? Might make a difference
No, that is absurd! It makes no difference in the grade at all whether you lead or TR a climb. :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
tradpuppy
Nov 25, 2003, 3:52 PM
Post #5 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2002
Posts: 722
|
Sandrock ratings are notoriously soft. When I first started trad leading, I did a route on holiday block called "walking the dog", which is rated 5.9 in the DCA. I thought "wow, I led my first 5.9!!"
WRONG was I!!!
|
|
|
|
|
gregtrammell
Nov 26, 2003, 3:04 PM
Post #6 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2003
Posts: 190
|
i would go with the 5.8 rating. not only is that the grade the DCA gives, (very reliable) but that seems to be what most of us that have climbed it, seem to rate it as. having climbed it recently, i have no reason to believe it to be harder than 5.8.
|
|
|
|
|
furryfrisbee
Nov 27, 2003, 12:58 AM
Post #7 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2002
Posts: 260
|
It was my first outdoor climb, 4 or so years ago. I agree with the 5.8 rating, I was just pointing out the inconsistency of the ratings.
Reno: I looked at the climb today, and and it didn't look like anything had broken off. Someone was setting up on it, so I wasn't climbing it today.
|
|
|
|
|
afiveonbelay
Nov 27, 2003, 2:18 AM
Post #8 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2003
Posts: 178
|
In reply to: Sandrock ratings are notoriously soft. !
I concur. Just spent a day there after spending a season at the Gunks. Gravy Train is listed as 10a, lead it on sport and would probably go as a 6+ or 7- there. Good for the ego to lead at Sandrock, bad for the foundation.
ps. saw that the graffiti is as bad as it was 3 years ago
|
|
|
|
|
gasouthernclimber
May 22, 2005, 2:52 AM
Post #9 of 9
(3863 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2005
Posts: 8
|
I think the page you were looking at was just that of an individual who wanted to rate climbs higher for his own ego.
|
|
|
|
|
|
