RRC Archives

i dont have enough toes and fingers to use that chart

see scin, it is easy to get folks led astray..it is like a dog around cat food, or dudes around one hot girl at miguel's....

the point I was making was this. it clearly takes more dedication and energy as you go up the scale, so therefore more points awrded for harder grades..

my choice 5.10 worth 10 points...13a worth 100 points. so climbing 10 5.10's in a day is equal to sending one 5.13a in a day.....

We're too committed to this point system now - don't give in, Ray! It would mess up the order of the universe.

f(x)=205-14.8x
as defined by Danny
hmmmm
if we apply a linear correction to the send curve that sets the point system to
points=g(x)=-205+14.8x

This is still a linear scale. which is fine

I kind of like
g(x)=x^3/2x-32 starting at x=8 (starting at 5.8 )
where g(x) are sport points.
I think there should be a trad advantage but I am not sure what it should be.

Yasmeen wrote:We're too committed to this point system now - don't give in, Ray! It would mess up the order of the universe.

Yea, I appreciate Danny's work but man......it's getting really confusing. We may just have to all live with knowing we suck and the points just mean you're old and climb a bunch. But hey, I think getting out and climbing a ton of routes is just as good as working a 5.13 for weeks and sending it. Our point system gives the super obsessed moderate climbers a chance to get the glory of being on top of the RRC Rankings list. What a privilege!

We can just put Pigsteak up in the top 3 so he'll quit bitching.

This really, really hurt my brain, and all I did was skim over it. Holy shit...

512OW wrote:This really, really hurt my brain, and all I did was skim over it. Holy shit...

thats because you are really, really retarded.

I wasn't suggesting changing anything, I was just trying to think about ways to measure the difficulty function cause I like thinking about stuff like that. If it is close to linear it doesn't matter what the slope is, the relative rankings would still be the same. pigsteaks function has only 2 data points so I'll just assume it's linear too.

rustyvasectomy wrote:

512OW wrote:This really, really hurt my brain, and all I did was skim over it. Holy shit...

thats because you are really, really retarded.

I do drive the short bus...

Danny wrote:If it is close to linear it doesn't matter what the slope is, the relative rankings would still be the same.

The intercept is important. Your statement is true for all functions with near linear slopes starting at (0,0).