RRC Archives

SE, are trying to stir up shit because you are bored not climbing this week?? I'd like to know if "no protection" is just bouldering or if we are including solo climbing...I think if solo climbing is included I"d give it my vote,I'd say I can top rope red point 5.12, hang draws 5.11,place gear 5.9 but if I was to go solo....5.6 5.7 and that would be a big if. So butt naked solo.

Thank you Sharon9999 for your vote on butt naked solo climing. Anytime you wanna do so, let me know.

It's "buck naked" for the literate, or "butt necked" for the illiterate, but never "butt naked".

I would say butt naked soloing would be the easiest. There's no gear to place, no bolts to clip and no rope to drag. It simply has the harshest consequences. Thus, this hypothesis leads me to believe that top roping clothed would be the hardest followed closely by top roping naked (less weight).

512OW wrote:
You're still using the term "at your limit" to mean the difficulty of the moves... but that isn't what was asked, or should be asked. In any type of climbing, you can't boil it down to only the moves... and since all things are involved, "at your limit" should be a combination of all things. While "at your limit" may be a different number for each discipline, "at your limit" is still "at your limit".

You can argue semantics all day, but it still remains that if I am climbing at my personal limit I can probably hit higher numbers climbing sport than trad. Maybe its mental, maybe its lack of fintness to hang on and place gear...

To cold right now.....but maybe one of those 90 degree days, could be a new project...

Ascentionist wrote:

512OW wrote:
You're still using the term "at your limit" to mean the difficulty of the moves... but that isn't what was asked, or should be asked. In any type of climbing, you can't boil it down to only the moves... and since all things are involved, "at your limit" should be a combination of all things. While "at your limit" may be a different number for each discipline, "at your limit" is still "at your limit".

You can argue semantics all day, but it still remains that if I am climbing at my personal limit I can probably hit higher numbers climbing sport than trad. Maybe its mental, maybe its lack of fintness to hang on and place gear...

Exactly my point. You're talking about numbers. That wasn't really the question... or is that all we care about around here? I've done 12b's that felt harder than 13b's. It was because of my skill set... so I was climbing nearer to my limit, regardless of number.

My point is, whatever is the top level of your ability, regardless of genre, has absolutely zero to do with the number... it has to do with your personal experience and skill set.

Yep, and it's always harder to make a "near your personal limit" move a hundred feet above a #2 brassie than it is with a bolt that's at your waist.

Geez, good observation Sherlock. BUT... if you do your "hardest" with a bolt at your waist (say, 5.12a), and then your "hardest 100 feet out from a brassie (say, 5.8), then they are equivalent.... your "hardest". The poll didn't ask for the hardest number... just for the hardest at the extreme of your climbing "ability". I took "ability" to mean more than the YDS scale. I guess I'm alone in thinking that there is more to climbing than the given difficulty of the route...

sharon9999 wrote:To cold right now.....but maybe one of those 90 degree days, could be a new project...

Look forward to that...buck' or butt' nekked, either will do fine I guess.