Dear Shelf Road Chiseler:

Elijah Flenner wrote: By drilling pockets you are changing the rules of climbing.

I wasn't aware there are rules for climbing. Please PM me these rules so that I can be up to date.

Coeus wrote: I wasn't aware there are rules for climbing. Please PM me these rules so that I can be up to date.

I think you are isolating one sentence in order to discount my argument as a whole. While this practice is very prevalent on web discussion boards, it does not lead to a very good discussions.

The word "rule" might not have been the best choice, but you are kidding yourself in thinking that there are no unwritten "rules" in the climbing game. While these rules may change from person to person, they are still understood by many people who play the game (and in a sense it is only a game). In my climbing game, and many others, one rule is to climb a route without intentionally making holds such that the climbing is easier. The reason is that, once it becomes acceptable to make holds, then the challenge of climbing a route can be greatly diminished. Especially in an area with around 1,000 routes, why create a new one? If you want to create a route, why not do it in a gym? In fact, in the gym you have more freedom.

I would say that in most areas, no creation of holds to make the climbing easier is a rule of this fun, but meaningless, game we play.

Note: I actually think meaningless might be a little harsh, but this is a philosophical question of a different sort.

Elijah Flenner wrote:For me, the goal of rock climbing is to figure out how to climb a section of rock...while outside you should try to solve the puzzle presented to you.

+1

Elijah Flenner wrote: In my climbing game, and many others, one rule is to climb a route without intentionally making holds such that the climbing is easier.

You would be wise to remember that these are your "rules" and that others do not necessarily apply these "rules" to themselves.

Elijah, my interest in this thread is for someone to state why chipping a new hold is such an anathema. I am mostly interested in the paradox that drilling for bolts is acceptable and drilling for holds is not. Understand that I am not trying to take a stance on chipping. However, stating there are rules and not having a logical basis for these rules sounds awfully autocratic.

As I stated before, my current thoughts on the matter are that using a drill in any fashion brings the rock down to the climber's level.

Coeus wrote: You would be wise to remember that these are your "rules" and that others do not necessarily apply these "rules" to themselves. Elijah, my interest in this thread is for someone to state why chipping a new hold is such an anathema. I am mostly interested in the paradox that drilling for bolts is acceptable and drilling for holds is not. Understand that I am not trying to take a stance on chipping. However, stating there are rules and not having a logical basis for these rules sounds awfully autocratic. As I stated before, my current thoughts on the matter are that using a drill in any fashion brings the rock down to the climber's level.

Why do you think I don't have a logical basis for these rules? I think I told you may basis for my thoughts. I also don't see any paradox in drilling a bolt for protection as acceptable and drilling holds as not acceptable. One is to protect the climbing so it can be lead safely, and the other is so that the physical difficulty of the climbing is easier. I do believe that it is easy to differentiate these two motivations.

If there were few climbers in the world, then it would not matter what sort of rules we make for ourselves. However, this is not the case. There are different sorts of guidelines to development in different areas, and there are climbers who enjoy different sorts of climbing. By applying only on persons rules, they can easily detract from the experience of climbing for a large group of others. In this manner, one person can by selfish and negatively impact climbing for many. It is best to keep in mind that there are different unwritten "rules" that apply to different areas; in general the rules are decided upon by the community and not individuals. In a place like Shelf Road, there is no reason to create a hold to add one more climb.

There are areas where chipping has become acceptable. I do not find chipping to be morally reprehensible. There are many other actions that occur every day which makes my stomach churn; chipping is not one of them. However, I don't like to climb chipped routes and don't see the reason. It takes away from my climbing experience, and I would like to climb in areas where chipping is not an acceptable practice. I do believe that many others have the same opinion.

Elijah Flenner wrote: Why do you think I don't have a logical basis for these rules?

because they seem to be rooted in opinion

Elijah Flenner wrote: I think I told you may basis for my thoughts. I also don't see any paradox in drilling a bolt for protection as acceptable and drilling holds as not acceptable. One is to protect the climbing so it can be lead safely, and the other is so that the physical difficulty of the climbing is easier.

The paradox is that both require a drill yet one some find one acceptable and the other not. My contention is that both reduce the rock to the physical or mental ability of the climber.

Elijah Flenner wrote: By applying only on persons rules, they can easily detract from the experience of climbing for a large group of others.

yet you seem to be proposing that all climbers accept your rules.

Elijah Flenner wrote: It (chipping) takes away from my climbing experience

and bolts take away from some other people's experience.

I still don't see where a major difference lies between chipping and bolting.

Coeus wrote: As I stated before, my current thoughts on the matter are that using a drill in any fashion brings the rock down to the climber's level.

Regardless of whether its a bolt or not, wouldn't any form of protection bring the rock down to the climber's level? To me, utilizing protection is admitting that I am not 100% confident that I can climb without falling (or climb the rock on its level).

I can't believe this thread is still going.

Me neither...it is kinda like watching a train wreck though.

FYI...In Greek mythology, Coeus was the Titan of intelligence (no ego there!). And...titans are the giant sons and daughters of Uranus.

Go figure!

Coeus wrote: because they seem to be rooted in opinion The paradox is that both require a drill yet one some find one acceptable and the other not. My contention is that both reduce the rock to the physical or mental ability of the climber. yet you seem to be proposing that all climbers accept your rules. and bolts take away from some other people's experience. I still don't see where a major difference lies between chipping and bolting.

I am not proposing all climbers accept my rules, but I do propose that certain areas have certain rules and route developers should accept the rules for the specific area. There are areas where manufacturing holds is acceptable, but I choose not to climb in those areas. I do believe that for many the manufacturing of holds greatly diminishes the climbing experience, thus manufacturing holds should not be acceptable in the majority of areas. I, for one, believe that manufacturing a route should be left to the gym. Not all agree, and I can accept that.

Bolting and chipping changes the route either physically or mentally, and there is no argument there. In general bolting changes the mental challenge more than the physical challenge, and chipping changes the physical challenge more than the mental challenge. There is a clear distinction between changing the rock for one reason or the other. If you do not find it acceptable to do either, then I suggest you choose to climb where there are no bolts.

Bolts do take away from others experience, and there are places where bolts are used sparingly or not at all. If bolts take away from your experience, I don't recommend you going to a sport climbing area. It is good that different areas have these different rules, and as a community we should respect them and allow others to enjoy the many different aspect of climbing. As a side note, I have argued for areas to have no more bolts added to preserve it for people who prefer to climb without bolts.

I currently believe that you don't see the difference between chipping and bolting because you refuse to. I am not the first to describe the clear difference in the motivation of the two activities. It is acceptable to believe that chipping is fine, but one should also respect other climbers and follow the local ethics. At shelf that means do not manufacture holds. At other places, that may not be the case.

Crossing wrote: Regardless of whether its a bolt or not, wouldn't any form of protection bring the rock down to the climber's level? To me, utilizing protection is admitting that I am not 100% confident that I can climb without falling (or climb the rock on its level).

The difference is that when using a trad rack a climber has to take the weaknesses that the rock presents and when the climber finished, hopefully no hardware remains.

Ross Keller wrote: Coeus was the Titan of intelligence (no ego there!). And...titans are the giant sons and daughters of Uranus. Go figure!

More like I am seeking knowledge rather than trying to dispense it.
But yes, I do have a bit of an ego.

Elijah Flenner wrote: I currently believe that you don't see the difference between chipping and bolting because you refuse to. I am not the first to describe the clear difference in the motivation of the two activities. It is acceptable to believe that chipping is fine, but one should also respect other climbers and follow the local ethics. At shelf that means do not manufacture holds. At other places, that may not be the case.

It isn't that I refuse to, I just see terrible arguements made on all sides regarding this issue. I don't think that motivation should factor into it, because it is more about the end result. I also agree that local ethics should be followed. I am not suggesting chipping should or shouldn't be allowed at Shelf, and if the prevailing ethic is no chipping, then that is fine.

I like to climb. Its really fun. If someone hadn't taken the time to chip the hell out of my local crag,(owl tor) it would not exist. Thank you chippers. If you chip you should be more outspoken. You've made some of best routes I've ever fallen off of.

P.S. Love what you did with smith rock

ryan beavers wrote:I like to climb. Its really fun. If someone hadn't taken the time to chip the hell out of my local crag,(owl tor) it would not exist. Thank you chippers. If you chip you should be more outspoken. You've made some of best routes I've ever fallen off of. P.S. Love what you did with smith rock

We definitely have different opinions on chipping, but that is fine. Just a quick question.

What make climbing at Owl Tor better than climbing in a gym? Is it just because it is outside?

Coeus wrote: The difference is that when using a trad rack a climber has to take the weaknesses that the rock presents and when the climber finished, hopefully no hardware remains.

So the difference between bringing the rock down to the climbers level is whether your climbing the weakness of the rock or not? and if the weakness wasn't there it shouldn't be climbed? Your use of the word weakness is vague, to me a weakness could be a ladder of holds, not necessarily providing a gear placement. To me it sounds like your saying that trad climbing is the only form of climbing not bringing the rock down to the climbers level, while rejecting my suggestion that free soloing and deep water soloing are a much higher standard of confronting the rock on its level due to the lack of protection.

speaking of PA, i think 'manufractured' takes the cake for sure!

If cams and bolts did not exist, the climbing "community" would be reduced by at least 95%. And that's even if chipping was accepted.

Dig really deep and think about it. Are you part of that 95%...?

I think I see what you're saying Richard, but what does that have to do with creating hand holds on a 5.11?

It has do with "bringing the rock to your level" more broadly. That, apparently, is what the chipper did and to what, apparently, most of the posters on this thread object.