|
|
|
|
ninjaslut
Aug 11, 2004, 7:30 PM
Post #1 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 260
|
I don't mean to start a debate here. I'm looking for a simple answer from somone who knows slacklining better than me, which will hopefully be "Yeah, that's a joke". If the following is not a joke, then I guess there is a debate here.
I recently saw an image description claim that it showed someone "Onsighting" a slackline. Is this a joke? Are all climbing ascent terms now appropriated for slacklining? Can you "Flash" a line? "Redpoint" it? "Hang Dog" it? I can understand a leashless crossing of a high slackline being referred to as "soloing", because a fall would be equally diasterous as a solo climber fall, but those other terms just don't seem appropriate.
It's worth noting an "onsight" of a particular difficulty climb because that would recognize that the climber was not only skilled enough to do a climb of that level, but also adaptable enough to respond correctly to all the unexpected elements present on a route he had not previously inspected. Although I recognize that a 175' line is harder to cross than a 30' line, and a 3,000' high highline presents a different emotional challange than a 2' backyard practice line, I just don't see how you can refer to any slicklining as an "onsite". There just aren't any external surprises, regardless of where you put the anchors.
|
|
|
|
|
coldclimb
Aug 11, 2004, 8:33 PM
Post #2 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2002
Posts: 6909
|
It's just a guess, but I would say that there's no deep underlying serious meaning to calling it an onsight. The person submitting the pic most likely just meant that they did the line their first try, and being a climber, the word "onsight" was the first one that sprang to mind.
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaslut
Aug 11, 2004, 8:39 PM
Post #3 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 260
|
Yeah, you're probably right about that.
|
|
|
|
|
slackdaddy
Aug 12, 2004, 5:04 AM
Post #4 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 15, 2004
Posts: 57
|
In reply to: There just aren't any external surprises, regardless of where you put the anchors.
This is not true. If no one has stepped out on a newly rigged highline, no one has any idea how tight the line is and you may not know exactly how long the line is. In addition to that, balance is often visual. The view you have can effect how easy it is to balance.
|
|
|
|
|
berserk
Aug 12, 2004, 6:24 AM
Post #5 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2003
Posts: 59
|
Doesn't matter. Slacklining is all lame 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
joe
Aug 12, 2004, 3:50 PM
Post #6 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2003
Posts: 897
|
In reply to: Doesn't matter. Slacklining is all lame 8^)
only because you can't do it. go topchuff up another 5.8, brizzo.
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaslut
Aug 12, 2004, 4:07 PM
Post #7 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 260
|
In reply to: In reply to: There just aren't any external surprises, regardless of where you put the anchors. This is not true. If no one has stepped out on a newly rigged highline, no one has any idea how tight the line is and you may not know exactly how long the line is. In addition to that, balance is often visual. The view you have can effect how easy it is to balance.
Let's assume the view does effect your balance. I hardly think that that qualifies as a "surprise". You can see the view as well from the edge as you can from the line, and certainly can get an understanding of any vertigo you'll have to deal with. Frankly, if the view is the most of your worries, then you should blindfold yourself until you get on the line if you want to call it an "onsight". Otherwise, in climbing terms, you may has well have just repelled down the route pre-climb and felt up every feature before the attempt...that would hardly be an onsight.
As for tension, you know everything there is to know about the tension of a line after you take your 10th step (and probably earlier). There is no external surprise to that. It's not like a slickline is going to start really loose...then tighten up...then go limp again. I don't mean to knock the activity; it's a tough skill and it takes balls, but the terms we use for climbing reflect the fact that a climber doing a route for the first time has very little information about the experience until he's done it. There is no question of routefinding skill in slacklining; you just walk straight until you're done. There's no such thing as a tricky hold in slacklining, or an invisible lifesaving jug; it's all the same line.
|
|
|
|
|
joe
Aug 12, 2004, 4:14 PM
Post #8 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2003
Posts: 897
|
onsighting a slackline is like onsighting at indian creek.
|
|
|
|
|
areyoumydude
Aug 12, 2004, 4:22 PM
Post #9 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 1971
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: There just aren't any external surprises, regardless of where you put the anchors. This is not true. If no one has stepped out on a newly rigged highline, no one has any idea how tight the line is and you may not know exactly how long the line is. In addition to that, balance is often visual. The view you have can effect how easy it is to balance. Let's assume the view does effect your balance. I hardly think that that qualifies as a "surprise". You can see the view as well from the edge as you can from the line, and certainly can get an understanding of any vertigo you'll have to deal with. Frankly, if the view is the most of your worries, then you should blindfold yourself until you get on the line if you want to call it an "onsight". Otherwise, in climbing terms, you may has well have just repelled down the route pre-climb and felt up every feature before the attempt...that would hardly be an onsight. As for tension, you know everything there is to know about the tension of a line after you take your 10th step (and probably earlier). There is no external surprise to that. It's not like a slickline is going to start really loose...then tighten up...then go limp again. I don't mean to knock the activity; it's a tough skill and it takes balls, but the terms we use for climbing reflect the fact that a climber doing a route for the first time has very little information about the experience until he's done it. There is no question of routefinding skill in slacklining; you just walk straight until you're done. There's no such thing as a tricky hold in slacklining, or an invisible lifesaving jug; it's all the same line.
Sorry you can't relate. I climb and I slackline. Onsite is an apropriate term for slacklining. I am not going to waste my time explaining it again.
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaslut
Aug 12, 2004, 4:30 PM
Post #10 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 260
|
In reply to: Sorry you can't relate. I climb and I slackline. Onsite is an apropriate term for slacklining.
Stop the presses; I'm now convinced.
In reply to: I am not going to waste my time explaining it again.
"Again"? Have you explained it elsewhere? If so, please send a link.
|
|
|
|
|
areyoumydude
Aug 12, 2004, 4:44 PM
Post #11 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 1971
|
Why do you care?
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaslut
Aug 12, 2004, 4:48 PM
Post #12 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 260
|
I'm one of those obsessive nerds with emotional problems who decides to focus on laguage and ponitifcate about its misuse, rather than talk about thigs which actually matter. Either that, or this is the internet and I'm bored.
|
|
|
|
|
areyoumydude
Aug 12, 2004, 5:04 PM
Post #13 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 1971
|
So do you have a better word to use? I'm a climber so I relate to climbing terms that seem to fit. To me the word onsite fits.
The tension on a slackline is different though out the line. Walking ten steps out is not going to give you the feel of the whole line. I have fallen off a slack(high)line after passing the middle many times.
Have you ever done a route where you past the crux only to fall on easier terain?
|
|
|
|
|
areyoumydude
Aug 12, 2004, 5:07 PM
Post #14 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 1971
|
In reply to: In reply to: Doesn't matter. Slacklining is all lame 8^) only because you can't do it. go topchuff up another 5.8, brizzo.
Brizzo? That's what I use to scrub my bum in the shower.
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaslut
Aug 12, 2004, 6:37 PM
Post #15 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 260
|
In reply to: So do you have a better word to use? I'm a climber so I relate to climbing terms that seem to fit. To me the word onsite fits.
I'd describe any sucessful crossing of a highline without falls as a complete traverse. If you fall, it becomes a broken traverse. In active usage, one would say something like: "Areyoumydude attempted a complete traverse on this 130' highline at a height of 2000' while holding an open Guiness in each hand, but was set upon by an unfavorable wind and a malicious lack of tension, causing him to to break traverse twice at both 30' and 110' feet out. A memorial service is planned later today for the 20 ounces of Guiness that were lost."
I still don't see the point in inventing a term that acknowledges success specifically on the first attempt of a highline. There's no term for skating a triple lutz on the first attempt in a given rink or holding an iron cross on the first try in a particular stadium, or sticking a triple lindy on the first dive over a new pool. All of them are difficult acrobatic feats, but I think not so different in varying locations that athletes congratulate themselves for doing it here or there without having a chance to acclimate to slight differences in environment.
|
|
|
|
|
areyoumydude
Aug 12, 2004, 9:03 PM
Post #16 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 1971
|
I like your desciption. When you do your first highline/slackline crossing you can call it whatever you want.
Obviously it is harder to send a highline the first time on it than it is to try it over and over untill you send it. On every highline I have tried I was trying for the onsite. I have onsited one highline. All the others I had to work it to some extent to be able to send.
|
|
|
|
|
areyoumydude
Aug 12, 2004, 9:04 PM
Post #17 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 1971
|
edit:double post
|
|
|
|
|
supersonick
Aug 12, 2004, 9:35 PM
Post #18 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2002
Posts: 157
|
Sure you can "onsight" a slackline. You can onsight anything. For example, "I went to the bar last night and onsighted this chick, Kelly." Or if you had beta from a friend about her, then you just sent her. (or perhaps flashed her?)
|
|
|
|
|
berserk
Aug 12, 2004, 11:38 PM
Post #19 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2003
Posts: 59
|
On-sight, flash, redpoint etc......its all simple terms we use to elevate our own ego's. :oops:
|
|
|
|
|
areyoumydude
Aug 13, 2004, 4:58 PM
Post #20 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 28, 2003
Posts: 1971
|
In reply to: On-sight, flash, redpoint etc......its all simple terms we use to elevate our own ego's. :oops:
Grow up kid and get a clue.
|
|
|
|
|
actionfigure
Aug 18, 2004, 6:23 PM
Post #21 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2004
Posts: 107
|
I think you should at least recognize a "first ascent" of a new slackline.
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaslut
Aug 18, 2004, 6:25 PM
Post #22 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 260
|
In reply to: I think you should at least recognize a "first ascent" of a new slackline.
You're kidding, right?
|
|
|
|
|
actionfigure
Aug 18, 2004, 6:34 PM
Post #23 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2004
Posts: 107
|
no way. if someone does a new high line where one has never been done, they deserve some credit. How is that any more silly than someone doing a 40' sport climb or a 3 move boulder problem.
|
|
|
|
|
ninjaslut
Aug 18, 2004, 6:51 PM
Post #24 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2003
Posts: 260
|
In reply to: no way. if someone does a new high line where one has never been done, they deserve some credit. How is that any more silly than someone doing a 40' sport climb or a 3 move boulder problem.
Well, first of all, it would be a "first traverse", as an "ascent" would require an increase of altitude.*
Secondly, a slackline isn't a permanent fixture like a sport or trad route is. The rock on a route really only changes slightly when events like hold breakage occur, but once a slackliner's party is done, he breaks his equipment down and goes home. Since the slackline setup (particularly tension) changes the nature of the traverse, the next slackliner would really be doing something different unless he used the same setup. So every party to cross a single gorge on their own slackline is really a kind of first ascentionist.
Again, I'm not knocking the sport, I just think the terminology of rockclimbing was designed to specifically fit the accomplishments and challenges of climbing. Slacklining is different, so not all the terms can be expected to work. Suppose climbers starting making bows and arrows out of retired rope and a whole subculture of climbing archers developed. Would you then suggest that every target hit be refered to as a redpoint?
-Ninja
* EDIT: Yeah, I realize that a new horizontal boulder problem could earn its creater the title of "first ascentionist", even if the end of it isn't higher than the begining. But, since the aim of the sport in general is to climb UP something, we refer to it as an "ascent". As the aim of slacklining in general is to move across something, "traverse" seems much more appropriate, even if the end of a line happens to be higher than the begining in some cases.
|
|
|
|
|
actionfigure
Aug 18, 2004, 7:28 PM
Post #25 of 32
(5354 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 18, 2004
Posts: 107
|
you make valid points. I guess the only point I was trying to make is that if someone comes along and sets up the first ever high line across some gorge, that it is as worthy of recognition as anything. Call it whatever you want. "first traverse"
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
