RRC Archives

Yeah, okay, maybe I infer a bit too much to rock climbing. It isn't really an allegory for life is it?

You left out "Now snatch this pebble from my hand,Grasshopper."

Cure for RRG sandbag ratings:

1. Go to Seneca Rocks and do a route in the grade range in question.
2. Come back and adjust accordingly.

There are no sandbags at Seneca, everything else is just soft!

anyone that feels the burn of downrating has a pebble in their snatch

anything can be a good allegory. I saw 3 crows eating a dead flat poodle today. It was alot like working for the man.

who is "the man".....? anyone who makes more money than us?

pigsteak wrote:......implicit in your accusation, sir charlie, is that number chasing is an evil activity. can you prove that not caring is any more nobel than caring?

Not better or worse, it's just what works for me but if I touched a nerve.....

I have number chasing goggles just like everyone else. I wouldn't call them evil I just try not to wear them that often. Seriously, when I hear people quibbling over a couple letter grades it's just funny. I try and treat numbers like I treat recipes, for me they are merely a guideline and should be seasoned to taste. I've been shut down by so many boulder problems (and routes) that were rated significantly lower than some of the other stuff I've cruised that it seems silly to get caught up in them.

I heard from somebody that was there at the time that "Ro" was originally graded 5.11c by Jamie Baker when he did the FA. Somehow it was later recorded as 5.12a in the guidebook and it has remained that way ever since. It still doesn't change the route or the experience though...

Has anyone ever asked somebody what they think about a route and received a reply about the grade instead? For example... What did you think about that route?

Answer: It was soft for the grade. Or, it felt like 10b.

That's not what I asked. If I wanted to know what you thought about the grade then I would have asked, "What did you think about the grade?"

J-Rock, I hear so many people inadvertently spray too... When you ask some people what they got on, what they did etc. it's always, "Well, first I got on this .11b, then I onsighted a 5.blah blah blah"... Uh, okay... I should be more clear... what kind of route did you do? What were the moves like? How was the climbing? The placements? Etc. etc... I don't care about the number, just tell me about the experience.

I asked Baker a long time ago if he knows about the "debate" about Ro... He just shrugs his shoulders (please note, I'm not speaking for him at all... just my recollection of the conversation, so take it as that). You know, I climb nowhere near as hard as he does/did/will, but I appreciate someone who really does not care about numbers and just has fun. I know ratings can help in terms of safety etc. for some, but I guess you just can't teach some people humility when so many of us are already so self-absorbed.

Grading is subjective. I would love to hear a logical approach from someone regarding how they grade routes... and not by feel, or experience, but a really logical, systematic approach. I feel like it's impossible, and grades are merely suggestions to me for safety. Like, hey, this is a 5.10-ish trad route. To me, that means don't lead it... yet.

Honestly, I would like to just sandbag the shit out of every route in the Red. Just drop everything two full number grades and see what people say about the area then. That will end the debate once and for all.

Or not...

I guess my question is... if I climb your route and downgrade it, what do you care? And if you climb my route and downgrade it, what do I care?

And J-Rock, I've climbed some of your routes... and I had fun. Thanks!

Do you always talk youself in circles like that?