It's just a (fill in the blank) route, it's not that bad
Posted: Wed Oct 30, 2002 2:01 am
Man, ya know what I hear a lot that's kind of strange?
When people are referring to a route they can't do and they say things like:
a) It's really not that bad, it's just an endurance route or
b) It's really not that bad, it's just a couple of hard moves or
c) It's really not that bad, it's just kind of technical
I mean, isn't the whole challenge of sending a route usually linking up all of the moves in one go without falling? Isn't that what gives a route a higher grade? How can any of the three main ingredients of a hard rating be downplayed in such a manner?
I think the one I hear most is:
a) It's really not that bad, it's just an endurance problem
Man, endurance is probably one of the most time consuming aspects of physical strength to build. It may take a person a year to build the kind of endurance needed to send the route they're saying "isn't that bad because it's an endurance problem".
When people are referring to a route they can't do and they say things like:
a) It's really not that bad, it's just an endurance route or
b) It's really not that bad, it's just a couple of hard moves or
c) It's really not that bad, it's just kind of technical
I mean, isn't the whole challenge of sending a route usually linking up all of the moves in one go without falling? Isn't that what gives a route a higher grade? How can any of the three main ingredients of a hard rating be downplayed in such a manner?
I think the one I hear most is:
a) It's really not that bad, it's just an endurance problem
Man, endurance is probably one of the most time consuming aspects of physical strength to build. It may take a person a year to build the kind of endurance needed to send the route they're saying "isn't that bad because it's an endurance problem".