steep4me wrote:I, like many others, have logged more hours than that and I can still barely redpoint easy 12's. I consider expert as 13a and up. Maybe 10 more years of climbing 3 days a week will do it for me?
Logging hours is not the same thing as training. Gladwell is talking about dedicated training in a limited field of study or athletics, not just time put in.
So...climbing 3-4 days a week for 15 years, training for power and endurance on alternating days; cross-training aerobic capacity on off days by bike riding; using weights to build up muscles that are underused in climbing; and also doing daily core work is "just putting time in?"
What do you consider to be training?
Hauling a big ego up a route adds at least a full grade.
I would say that you are glossing over your training. There is no way you have trained that hard for 15 years and not made it past easy 12s. I don't think 13a is out of reach for anyone who doesn't have a mental or physical disability or who is not at the extremes of the bell curve in body structure. The training you described would have most physically fit people at 12a in 1 year. Even giving them a year for each subsequent grade, that is still 13a in 5 years.
The theory of evolution is just as stupid as the theories of gravity and electromagnetism.
I agree sax, I climbed for 7 years, regularly outdoors, not much indoor. I knew the ropes for sure, maybe not 10,000 hours but I was completely experienced on belaying and general safety, I could not climb harder than a 10, but had lots of red time. Eventually I quit being lazy and started to train outside the red and within a few months I was climbing easy 12's. every time I decide to bump up my training I get better at climbing rapidly, most of the time though, I am lazy and just enjoy being outside so I fall back down again. I believe I could climb a 13 if I didn't have the mental disability toward consistency. And physically I am a ginger nuf said
How you compare may not be as important as to whom you are compared
The idea here is 10,000 hours is a benchmark. If you pursue something to be an expert then the benchmark is about 10,000 hour. Its easy to call someone an expert carpenter, auto mechanic, etc. But there are not many climbing experts. For me I guess climbing expertise involves being well versed in many of the different disciplines and so I don't think many of the "elite" climbers are experts. I would bet that many of the 5.14+ climbers out there can't even place gear or use an atc.
I don't know, you gingers are tough wiry motherfuckers. Same here Kramp, my spray sheet time line has more holes than a sieve, but i have made huge gains in the last 6 months with just a little consistency.
The theory of evolution is just as stupid as the theories of gravity and electromagnetism.
rhunt wrote: I would bet that many of the 5.14+ climbers out there can't even place gear or use an atc.
That's like saying a heart surgeon can't do a facelift so they are not an expert doctor. At that level, Gladwell is talking about very narrow fields of expertise. Most classical pianists are not proficient at Jazz, but could learn in time, yet they are still expert pianists.
The theory of evolution is just as stupid as the theories of gravity and electromagnetism.
I agree, training hard for many years doesn't make you an expert climber but it does make you an expert trainer. Finally I am an expert at something - training and injury recovery!
Hours equal experience for pilots, why not climbers?
I think it's because climbing is too broad. Newbies come out of the gym nowadays and send sport 12's in their tennies. It's a different sport now than even 5 years ago.
IMO, physical ability cannot be a consistent measure to one's experience level in sport climbing. My bouldering buddy could crank V8 and muscle his way up 5.12 but yet he didn't know how to safely belay .
Time proven climbing skills are quickly being replaced by gear that thinks for you and bolting practices that remove all thought and danger from the line.
Who needs to know all the knots and techniques anymore anyways? With sport climbing, one knot is all you need to know.
Who counts the falls on their rope anymore or measures the fall factor? 10 years ago I retired a rope for taking one factor 2 fall.
And rigging a safe belay station?? Yea right...
But "climbing" is what it is and I can't say I don't mind. I now have a harness I don't need to double back, an autolocking biner I don't need to check, and safely bolted sport climbs making the Red an adult romper room and playhouse.
The only part I don't like is when some kid ends up hurt or dead with the news headline "experienced climber ...." when really he or she didn't know what the heck they were doing.
Does he have a strange bear claw like appendage protruding from his neck? He kep petting it.
Artsay wrote:The only part I don't like is when some kid ends up hurt or dead with the news headline "experienced climber ...." when really he or she didn't know what the heck they were doing.
That's why I posted the link to the Rocky Mountain Rescue newsletter. The injured party was an "experienced climber" who showed his appreciation and gratitude for the expertise of his rescuers.
"Be responsible for your actions and sensitive to the concerns of other visitors and land managers. ... Your reward is the opportunity to climb in one of the most beautiful areas in this part of the country." John H. Bronaugh
nuf said