excessive down rating

Post by **chriss** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 2:55 pm

Ascentionist wrote:
goodguy wrote: I think that the finishing moves on the arete above the last Blue alien that is placed are probably the crux.
Then the route would definitely be harder for me. I don't have a blue alien. Or would that make it easier for me? Maybe the blue alien wouldn't be blocking a sweet fingerlock so it would be more like 5.8 for me. Not sure.

You can also place blue tcu, grey tcu, or nuts in several different places.

Post by **ynot** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 4:05 pm

I bet if someone downrated Miguel's pizza it would piss off everyone.

Post by **Spragwa** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 8:01 pm

Damn straight! Miguel's is the best ever.

Post by **pigsteak** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 1:34 pm

not if you have had the pie at the New along with the local suds.

and don't forget their spinach salad to start.

Post by **J-Rock** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 11:35 pm

Yeah, Pies and Pints is pretty good too.

Post by **tonybubb** » Fri Feb 17, 2006 1:22 am

If you make it so that any 'rating' of a climb can not be off by more than 2 letter grades, then what happens to Ray's "not harder than 11a" rating of "Boogered" (originally 11d)? That's 3 letter grades.
Frankly, I think he's sandbagging, but the original grade was for a dirt-filled crack that's now nice and clean.
So the rating is prbably 11b or 11c, by reports I have heard.

Now, if someone OVERGRADES by 3 letters, then it would reject all suggestions that were accurate and also take an infinate number of still overgraded ratings just to bring it down to a grade 1 above the real grade.

Particularly with new rotues, as they clean up, they can get easier, or as fragile holds break, tehy get easier. I would suggest a full number grade as a better bound for difficulty.

Over time, if the 'ratings' are cataloged so that you can see who voted what, and the overall user profile catalogs what someone posted versus consensus as an average (IE 43 rotues voted, average grade = consensus -2.5) then you can say F%$# the sandbagger, and never-mind their opinion.

Check out www.mountainproject.com and see how they handled the grading game. They did a decent job.

Post by **SCIN** » Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:09 am

tonybubb wrote:If you make it so that any 'rating' of a climb can not be off by more than 2 letter grades, then what happens to Ray's "not harder than 11a" rating of "Boogered" (originally 11d)? That's 3 letter grades.

Special case. Dude, about 5 of use onsited or flashed that thing and agreed that it could be no harder than 5.11b. A 5.12a rating (which is what you had it as originally) on that crack did nothing but prevent people from checking out a sweet line. I'm sure to you it felt 5.12a because of how you were doing it or because it was a dirty crack or because you did it while lit on fire but shit man it's pretty straightforward.

Shit, I'll change my code to reject by three letter grades instead of two. There you go. The Boogered downgrade fits right in.

Oh yea, I did give it 5.11b in the hardcopy guide.

Post by **tonybubb** » Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:19 am

Actually, You've got your facts wrong. I NEVER rated it 12a. I rated it 11+. Other folks upgraded it.
And what about "Missing the Obvious" Which someone intially graded 5.10 after failing to climb it free. I ended up down-grading to 5.8+.

My point is the same, that particularly for NEW routes, grades will change beyond 2-3 letter grades.

--------------
"Well then, I hope your peepee smells like poopoo. If your dog is a $hit-eater, you are in for a better than average blowjob tonight."

Post by **SCIN** » Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:22 am

You may want to have a talk with your bud Jerry Bargo then:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.clim ... 8072c5f3de

Post by **SCIN** » Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:25 am

And here's your own self calling it 5.12b/c. Remember now?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.clim ... c6e7b4cc87