512OW wrote:
anticlmber wrote:
grades are fine for measuring YOUR gain, NOT for measuring someones worth, or how much they "suck" what if a person only has one arm yet climb 5.10. that;s a shite number, (by the number game standard) are they weak-asses?? so why if someone only wants to climb to a certain grade are they accepting mediocrity. they are psyched, why can't you be?
The "number game standard"?? What the hell are you talking about? If a one armed person climbs 5.10, and last year they climbed 5.9, then they are bad ass. Why? Because they push themselves, instead of sitting around making excuses about how they climb "for themselves".
You use the numbers the same as everyone else. You're just too "enlightened" to see it....
'Number game standard', referring to the grade of difficulty or skill level needed for a certain route, but likely also the level at which people are rated by others. i.e. you can climb a 5.12? you're good and worthy of a real climber's time because you are competitors and peers. vs. you do 5.9? You're not very dedicated/skilled- train harder to be like us. (?)
It seems like the gist of what you're all talking about.
Numbers, numbers, compare, compete, progress . . . Some just do it to be outdoors, no pressures to do x,y,z, just to enjoy. There aren't any excuses, only justifications to explain that 'progress' and 'certain numbers' are not the goal for everyone. Don't care what rating a climb is, only if it gave me a good time. Whether or not it's an 'onsite' or not, 10, or 12, multiple tries. . .doesn't really matter
Remember the phrase, "It's not about winning or losing - it's how you play the game; and if you had fun" ? Motivating, huh? Encouraging. Don't remember the part where the coach points out it's really 'an excuse' for people who aren't as good.
The best years of your life are the ones in which you decide your problems are your own.
You do not blame them on your mother, the ecology, or the president.
You realize that you control your own destiny.
Albert Ellis