RRC Archives

nice paul - i guess i warmed up a bit and...nevermind, then did some cool problems and had fun one time too. golly, bouldering is different.

i read the wwjbd translation:

v0: i'll never flash it if people are watching. i'll say it's fun if I do flash it, but it's just "okay" if I don't.

v1: my ego will say it's easy, then it'll take 10 trys, after i get over myself, i'll say it was fun.

v2: i will probably make some grunting sound and feel bad for struggling if my spotters flashed it. i'll think it's fun unless everybody else thinks it was too easy.

v3: usually feels easier than v2 because i expect it to be harder. definitely fun!

v4: definitely not just fun anymore... starting to become real work.

v5: fun to work until i realize it'll never go. then no fun at all.

v6: fun to try to get off the ground and count to 3 before falling on my ass

v7 and up: fun to watch stronger climbers play on

Wish I could find the rest of this ratings guide. I think it might be in Sherman exposed? No idea where my copy is, so if someone has a copy and can complete the list, it would be super cool.

the verm wrote:

V4 is, "A problem that might give you trouble,
but, 'Hey, anything below V5 is so easy I can't tell the difference.'"

V6 is "A problem that, if you lived in Boulder Colorado,
you would expect your girlfriend to flash."

andrew, I don't have any projects brah. if I don't get it in 5 minutes, it was a pile anyway.

The real evolution is to just look at a problem, know you can do it, then move on to the next one. To actually touch the rock is to lower oneself from a bouldering nirvana-like spiritual omniscience.

now y'all are getting it.

screw ratings, screw actual climbing....

longlegsrule wrote: I think a lot of the 4's are soft...

if you are climbing 4's shouldn't you be in intermediate?

why climb in intermediate when there is booty to be had in beginner?

btw, are there any other sports like climbing where ones lack of hard skills is rewarded with plentiful prizes? this is a serious question. example, the male and female who finish last in elite, but boulder harder than 95% of those in the categories below them, get nothing. what is the incentive for improving and moving up a category? wouldn't it be better to just put everyone in one category, not by sexes or supposed skill levels? then determine to give prizes to the top 10 finishers, and then random prizes down thru the ranks....

another poster here made a comment today to me that I thought was appropriate. if it is all about the good times and vibes and hanging with "cool" friends, then why do we worry about our comp tshirts, standings and booty? in the real "cool" world that we climbers live in, wouldn't we all be better served by graciously declining the prizes, and instead encourage sponsors to donate to the access fund or local climbing issues. and I don't mean some small percentage, but the entire entry fees....just a thought for those of us who believe our "lifestyle" to be one with mother nature.

pigsteak wrote:wouldn't we all be better served by graciously declining the prizes, and instead encourage sponsors to donate to the access fund or local climbing issues. and I don't mean some small percentage, but the entire entry fees...

You're absolutely right, Piggie. We should put aside all thoughts of personal gain in exchange for the betterment of the Collective.

Comps are cool, prizes are fun, and the vibes are usually good. People sandbag / and or cheat, such is life. I don't go to win, just like I don't go to Keeneland expecting to make money. Besides, there is no division to bump me up into anymore.

I think some people have suggested "floating" devisions, where they take the scores, and use some kinda of formula to place people based on %. Sounds cool.

That said, I went to rocktown this weekend, rather then LRC. But, not because I am against comp, just decided I would rather do something different that weekend.