RRC Archives

on a related note, I would like to propose that Eureka should only have 2 stars. I don't see the big attraction. Maybe 1 star? It's okay, but didn't meet my expectations of a 3 star route.

*ducking*

Damn good post Merrick! I like the Internet Geek Consensus (IGC) idea too. ...and Sandy, I will have to agree with you about Eureka. Two stars at best.
Now do you value my opinion more?

Mj

at least as much as I value my own, Sik.

We need to climb, then I won't be able to dis you like this. Or maybe you won't take it seriously. Heh.

[quote="Sandy]I'd like to hear from Ray and Artsay and Muao Dib and Wes on this one, since I regard their opinions very highly.[/quote]

Where do you regard my opinion?

For the record I voted no and I'm with Sandy on the Eureka thing. As for the whole star rating thing isn't it kinda subjective?

I think that John has some good points as to why TDtLoT isn't a three star route to him. For me, the only one that personally detracts is the muddy start. For the aspiring 10a leader, the no-hands rest is a plus. Iffy start, tricky 10a crux, a few moves to the rest, then gunning into the overhang and up to the anchors. I enjoyed falling off of it numerous times, and I really enjoyed finally redpointing it!

Regarding the idea of not messing with what came from John's original guidebook - erm, IANAL, but that statement makes me nervous regarding IP issues. This is a new guide and it's a great opportunity to open the quality ratings up to an active consensus process. I don't think that three stars should be reserved for only unanimous decisions, but there should be a strong majority for the ne plus ultra of ratings.

Shoot I should never name names. I definitely could lengthen that list, but before I insult anyone else, I will just give in and say that a very strong majority vote works for me - or as I said before, 'near unanimous'. Howzat?

The bottom line is that quality ratings are definitely subjective. Any climb with a muddy start doesn't sound like 3 stars to me, but I voted for the third option since I haven't climbed it yet.

So I'm not alone in thinking Eureka is not 3 stars? I figured I'd get clobbered for saying that. On the other hand, I don't think it's important enough to warrant a full on debate. I think there are always going to be strong opinions about every route, when at the end of the day, 2 stars/3 stars... it's all good. Since no route will ever compare to Shaggy, I am inclined to strip them all of their stars!

Tom, what is IANAL? Are you saying you are anal retentive?? What does that have to do with anything?

That damp start was one my main reasons for not going with the 3 star rating.There are few more 10a s , i think Hard Left at Roadside should be 3 stars. It has clean rock, good moves face and crack not to mention a very cool finish.

Sandy,


Of course I was referring to the depressing rain situation for the coming weekend....not weather or not your lead of Defy will cause you to wet your pants or not Although I have seen some shinanigans (sp?) on that route that almost caused me to wet my pants

On a different note I would like to propose a 5 ***** rating system instead of 3. Now don't anyone go off and say, "Well hell why don't you just use an even 10 *'s."

* - Total pile, waste of time and/or hardwear.(Ex. Hoky Pals, sorry Johnny )
** - Fair climb, only worth doing after you've done the 3,4&5 * lines at that
particular crag. (Ex. Any of the Poopy Head climbs @ Torrent take your
pick )
*** - Average climb...good rock quality, but nothing to write home about.
(Ex. Diamond in the Rough, Minimum Creep, Loosen Up, G.I.)
**** - Great climb... (Ex. AWOL, DEFY, Super Dario, Subatomic Fingerlock, Seek
the Truth)
***** - George Classic! (Ex. Bare Metal Teen, Rock Wars, Twinkie, Roadside
Attraction)

This way we would have a little more definition kinda like 10a,b,c,d. In my opinion there are way too many *** routes in the book. Of coure the Red has a ton of awesome routes but they aren't all "Classics"...and of course like the old grade bickering we all seem to sometimes get into *'s are subjective.

Just curious to see if anyone else thinks a 5 * system somewhat like what I have listed above would make more sense. I think so.

Yeah, and let's change the names of all the routes too. There are some that I don't like. We can do that cause we hang out on the internet and no-one can stop us, right?

here's what I really think on the stars, but I don't consider myself the ultimate authority so I will not just do whatever the hell I want... Anyway, I personally feel very strongly that a 3 star route should be one that is unquestionably 3 stars. Period. No muddy starts, no breaking holds or fucked up clips or shady gear. 2 stars is one that a majority of people think deserves 3 stars, but that has some deficiency or another (like a muddy start for instance, ahem). 1 star is better than choss and definitely worth your time if you are there, but nothing you should go out of your way to do. That's just my lowly opinion, but there you go.

I don't think any areas use 5 stars, do they Power2U? I think it would be a major pain in the ass to change that. Otherwise it's a valid suggestion (but don't hold your breath).

Jeff, which route names would you like me to change? Since you have a cool woman and an awesome dog, I will.