East v. West: attitudes, unsolicited opinions, & self-righteousness

Jeff S wrote: this is the reason i have heard a lot of people state against soloing. it's not chicken shit at all. i think it is a legit point. those guys who were the first to criticize would have been the first people to have to help had something gone wrong. maybe they have already participated in some rescues and didn't like the experience too much.

I still think that more roped climbers hit the ground than unroped. So, if you're against unroped climbers because they might hit the ground, I think that you have to be against roped climbers for the same reason--they also might hit the ground. In fact, I'm going to say that they're more likely to hit the ground, statistically speaking. I don't think you can fairly separate the two.

Some climbers climb without a helmet. It may not be the best idea, but would you openly opine to someone that they were being "fucking stupid" if that's the way you felt?

I've personally climbed hundreds of pitches without a helmet. I know people have looked at me and thought, "What an idiot"--and worse I'm sure. I'm never had anyone say anything directly to me in all my years. I was blown away when this guy thought it was his duty to inform me what he thought about what I was doing.

--Marc

Greg Sievers wrote:Image his surprise when i waited for him in the parking lot, (having memorized his jacket/hat/pack colors) and politely asked why he felt it necessary to scream obsenities in the high country.

Nice. Hopefully that dude'll think twice before openly talking shit to someone because they disagree with what they're doing. I see people doing (what I think is) dumb shit all the time. I personally don't say something unless I think:

A. They are in immediate danger of hurting themselves or others and
B. They are unaware of the implications of their actions.

Of course if someone's waving a gun around a bank, there's no point in politely pointing out to them that they might hurt themselves or someone else.

--Marc

Marc Horan wrote: I still think that more roped climbers hit the ground than unroped. So, if you're against unroped climbers because they might hit the ground, I think that you have to be against roped climbers for the same reason--they also might hit the ground. In fact, I'm going to say that they're more likely to hit the ground, statistically speaking. I don't think you can fairly separate the two. Some climbers climb without a helmet. It may not be the best idea, but would you openly opine to someone that they were being "fucking stupid" if that's the way you felt? I've personally climbed hundreds of pitches without a helmet. I know people have looked at me and thought, "What an idiot"--and worse I'm sure. I'm never had anyone say anything directly to me in all my years. I was blown away when this guy thought it was his duty to inform me what he thought about what I was doing. --Marc

marc,
i have no idea who hits the ground more. i know we all take risks when we climb. what is acceptable to one person is 'fucking stupid' to the next. funny, i very recently told my good friend and climbing partner he was fucking stupid for not wearing a helmet on lead. i believe he told me to kiss his ass or some similar response. then he sent.
to answer your question though, no i would never tell someone who wasn't a friend with a sense of humor they were fucking stupid. i am not a very big fella, and i don't usually like to start fights with strangers, and them's fightin words. the thing i was pointing out was that others may be disturbed by the fact that your solo efforts could turn in to a group outing/ rescue if things go wrong. maybe they should have offered you a belay. i don't know. also i don't want to come off as anti solo, or super pro helmet no matter what. everyone do what they want. i recently found myself on a bouldering mission, turned easy highball mission (V0-), turned soloing adventure (5.4). it was great. i was with friends and we assessed the risks and were totally comfortable and stoked at the end of the day. i can see both sides of the issue, the east and the west side i guess...

happy climbing all.

Jeff S wrote:the thing i was pointing out was that others may be disturbed by the fact that your solo efforts could turn in to a group outing/ rescue if things go wrong.

My point is the same thing could happen to roped climbers...and most likely with more frequency.

I think you and I are pretty much in line with the rest of it though.

It's funny you just used those same words with your climbing partner and friend. :)

--Marc

Marc Horan wrote: My point is the same thing could happen to roped climbers...and most likely with more frequency. I think you and I are pretty much in line with the rest of it though. It's funny you just used those same words with your climbing partner and friend. :) --Marc

marc,
i can't say i disagree with you on the roped thing either. although, i have no idea how one would come up with the stats to prove it. how many posts have we read where someone was dropped by their belayer? or had gear pop? the safety system will only work if all parts of the system work, including an attentive belayer. it's really the main reason why i read these forums, so i know what to watch out for and so i can be as safe as possible.
have fun out there,
-jeff

What was said is that person's way of expressing concern for your well-being. They just did not express it in the correct way.

Joseph Stover wrote:What was said is that person's way of expressing concern for your well-being.

His stated concern was not having to "rescue" me; he was much more concerned with how his day was going than he was about me.

Joseph wrote:They just did not express it in the correct way.

He definitely did not express it correctly.

--Marc

I think you would have to look more at the percentage of times someone is injured while soloing versus roped climbing. Volume is not the best answer in this case, because I'm willing to be that there are A LOT more roped climbers on any given day than soloists.

I don't think there is any way to get this info, but just saying there are more roped incidents isn't really an accurate description of risk or danger.

Plus you'd have to edit out some things in roped climbing such as rockfall which aren't necessarily someones "fault"

Like any dangerous activity many of the participants shy away from saying it is just dangerous and yeah there is no backup plan. I'd much rather have someone say heck yeah it is dangerous and if I fall I die, but that is a risk I'm willing to take for XYZ reasons. It always sounds a bit lame to just say "oh you could die driving to the crag" - so do you drive there drunk without a seatbelt, 50mph over the speed limit. No. There is a higher level of risk you can take with all activities. Simply because people get hurt roped climbing doesn't make soloing technically less risky than roped climbing. Roped climbing you have to fall AND have something go wrong. Soloing you just have to fall. Pretty simple. I think one thing soloists don't think about is how if they did fall other people would react. There are a lot of questions when someone dies climbing and the "why didn't he use a rope" would be up there. Not saying there aren't questions when someone dies roped climbing, but soloing builds in other layers for your friends & loved ones to deal with. Especially if they don't "understand" the soloing thing.

The reason a lot more soloists aren't killed is because most of them climb well below their limit.

As far as your day at Ragged. I'm not a fan of soloing myself. However, what an ass I'd be to tell you off in such a manner. If you were soloing above me that would be one thing. If anything he could have been nice and when you were obviously finished tried to convince you of the dangers of soloing. Generally this is better done without saying you are fu*&ing stupid. I don't think this is an East Coast thing. Just an a-hole you had the pleasure of meeting.

This isn't some anti-soloing rant, it is your life - live it how you see fit. But just don't be so quick to dismiss the danger because people mess up in other ways.

I like to play a little game where if someone sees me soloing, I've lost. It was way fun trying to hide from people in the gunks. If there are too many people around to hide from them, I climb with them.

Tico wrote:I like to play a little game where if someone sees me soloing, I've lost. It was way fun trying to hide from people in the gunks. If there are too many people around to hide from them, I climb with them.

Definitely a commendable "shirt-on" attitude, Tico.

Marc, I think your experience might have less to do with geographic cultural types, and more to do with accident potential. Let me preface this by saying I don't have any problems with free soloists as long as, like all climbers, they exercise a degree of responsibility and consciousness toward the safety of others. This goes double at crowded places like Eldo, Lumpy, etc. Maybe your critics in CT were concerned that they might be hit by a falling body? Admittedly, a low probability, but it's there.

There have been a few times I've encountered soloists while I was climbing with a roped party. In all cases it's been on routes that had enough lateral movement that a falling soloist wouldn't have been a hazard, and I've never felt compelled to confront somebody or call them out. But if I thought there was a real hazard, I don't think I'd hesitate.

Tico wrote:I like to play a little game where if someone sees me soloing, I've lost. It was way fun trying to hide from people in the gunks. If there are too many people around to hide from them, I climb with them.

that's a cool solution! probably a good way to make new friends as well.

Ken Cangi wrote: And I would take the in-your-face attitude of Massholes any day of the week. You always know where you stand with them.

Funny thread. I'm definitely an east-coaster to the core. In fact, I'm the worst kind: a staunch New Englander (born in Maine live in Mass)! My mom lives in SoCal now and has been trying to get me to move there forever. No can do though. Had an experience in June at the Lee Vining Mobile (it's about a third of the way down the post) that I think compared east vs west fairly well.

I guess there's two things: 1) I just feel like east coaster's are more honest and; 2) east coaster's definitely are more high strung. Maybe it's the pressure of having to run the country. Who knows? But things are just way to laid back out there for me. Sure, the opinions get annoying sometimes (particularly the unsolicited ones), but you always know where you stand here. Never liked dealing with my stepfather's family (SoCal bred). All real nice when you walk through the door but you find out over time that they just don't want to be bothered. It's nice to know that up front, as it saves time, energy, and effort.

And oh yeah, Mass drivers aren't so bad. In fact, I think they're pretty damn good. I mean, where else can you learn to hit a 16-foot gap in traffic with a 15-foot vehicle going 75mph? That's not bad driving, that's good driving. =p