the odd nature of power vs technique

[merrick]

I have been thinking alot about the nature of bouldering lately. and i am starting to think that another way the idea of grading problems breaks down is with purely technical problems.

there are pure power problems. to send a problem like this you need a certain amount of strength. long pulls between small holds and such. pretty straight foward, you get stronger and you send harder.

then there are power endurance problems where you need to maintain the power moves over a long time(8-15+ moves). they require a good undestanding of technique and true foundation of power. those are the problems that you can do sections of relatively easily, but linking is really hard.

then there are technical power problems, where you need to understand the specific body tension and movement associated with a move. you might have to work a move for a long time to understand it. once you get it it still requires a fair amount of power to hit it.

combine the last two catagories and you start getting hard problems.

grading these problems sort of makes sense. if you ignore things like reach and wired techniques and such.

however there is the purely technical problem. this is the problem where the moves feel uterly impossible until you find that one specific body postion or tricky movement that works. the moves go from feeling too hard to be possible to relatively easy. even if there are a lot of moves, once you understand the puzzle you can do the problem and then repeat at will.

there was a problem i did this weekend that initially felt at my limit. the first time i pulled on to it i tried to power through it and could barely do a few moves on it. over time i figured out how to use the slopey undercling in the roof by setting my feet lower and using momentum to twist onto it, that there was a toe hook to make the sloper better, that a reverse bicycle made the match easier, that there was a knee bar for the reachy move, that angling your leg to the left made the knee bar so good that you could almost go no hands, that if you threw your heel up you could rock over it laterally...

anyway, this problem took me three session to send. it felt so hard. the process of learning the moves was unbelievably cool. however once i figure them all out the problem went easily. it didn't feel hard at all. and sending it oddly didn't give me the rush i normaly get. i was just sort of like oh, i guess i did the moves right. i repeated it again and it felt the same. i am sure that if i memorized the moves and then sat on the couch for a month i could probably send it again.

how do you grade something like that? do you give it a low grade since it is relatively easy if you both know and truly understand the beta? do you give it a high grade since without the technical muscle memory it is extremely hard? do you give it two grades, an onsite and a redpoint grade?

i guess i will just walk away from it with a reaffirmation that the process of climbing is truely better than accomplishing the goal.

[dhoyne]

Yet another example why you should climb for the experience of the climb, not the grade.

[Paul3eb]

i don't know the answer to your question but i feel that way about offwidth. right now, i know nothing of offwidth technique other than something about stacking hands and throwing a knee in with a toe hook.. but i've never done it. when i look at a .9 offwidth, i cringe and walk away. but if it were a .9 hand, finger, fist, whatever crack, or .9 sport.. i'd feel more than comfortable getting on it. different techniques i guess. i'm sure if i took the time to learn the techniques (one of these days when i feel more masochistic than i do now) i'm sure that it'll start to feel easier.. just a thought about what you were saying..

[pigsteak]

merrick, it was V9...these posers are too weak to tell you. screw the experience. the grade is the way to spray...

[usccabum1985]

read my siqniture nuff said, ( good job on the send )