How hard do people really climb?

I climb "WICKED HAAHD GUY" i am from freakin New England ;)

Well can we just all agree that Kentucky is east of the Mississippi and go with that.

Leftwich wrote: Kentuckians most certainly do not consider themselves to be mid-western. Specifically those from the Cumberland Plateau. It might be difficult to gather that from climbing at the red as it seems to be full of mid-westerners who have burned up the roads to get there.

Kentucky is definitely the South, but the Red is not a Southern crag, if that makes sense.

The mid-west isn't interested in KY, too many east coasties there.

camhead nailed it: "Kentucky is definitely the South, but the Red is not a Southern crag, if that makes sense."

i have done a few 5.12a sport routes in my day and i am no sport climber if i tried a 5.12a trad climb i would die. i think to reach 5.12 on sport is very very reasonable but someone that can free 5.12 multipitch is an extremely badass climber in my book. a little harder and you are up on mescalito with caldwell. i see someone on a 5.12 sport route every time i climb sport and rarely see people on 5.12 trad so id say quite a few people can climb 5.12 if youd even put them in the same category. just depends on the length and type of climbing

Grades are all relative to the climb. A 12 can be technical and easier for some people, and a different twelve can be burly and overhung with a massive dyno and can be easier for others.

5.12c V7

Jay Samuelson wrote:I love how projecting routes suddenly disqualifies them and makes them 'easy' or 'the sky is the limit'. Reminds me of how easy it is to climb everest cause a blind guy or a little kid climbed it. Apparently the logic is when you work harder and longer on something it's somehow easier.

Not for me. The hardest routes I've ever projected successfully are only a letter grade harder than my hardest onsights. And there are routes at that harder grade that I have tried dozens of times, and never done, while I regularly onsight routes just two letter grades easier.

I'm very good at sussing out the correct sequence and finding good rests while on a route. Simply put, I climb as hard as I climb. Working a route could never add a number grade to what I can do clean.

GO

GabeO wrote: Not for me. The hardest routes I've ever projected successfully are only a letter grade harder than my hardest onsights. And there are routes at that harder grade that I have tried dozens of times, and never done, while I regularly onsight routes just two letter grades easier. I'm very good at sussing out the correct sequence and finding good rests while on a route. Simply put, I climb as hard as I climb. Working a route could never add a number grade to what I can do clean. GO

I was in the same situation for many years. I decided I wanted to break through the plateau and started bouldering more seriously. It taught me how to try hard, and now I have a more standard redpoint/os split.

For the OP, I can generally os 12- sport, depending on the style.

Wyatt H wrote:So what am I doing wrong? I've got mountains of gear, climb occasionally, and obsess about climbing enough that I visit this site every day, but I can barely toprope a 5.8 without weighing the rope. I know a huge part of my problem is mental, but alot of the harder climbs (5.8) I either just can't figure out what to do, or even if I know what the move is, I just don't know how to do the move successfully without falling off. WTH is wrong with me? I'm in decent shape, no physical problems at all... I obviously need more practice and some teaching in order to progress, so I don't think I fall into the category of "I can climb 5.10 without trying."

There's nothing wrong with you :)

I am similar in that I can now regularly lead .8 but I still find it hard. For me it's mostly mental. I find that, especially when above gear, I get too focused on a potential fall and spend waaaay too much time contemplating moves.

Even if you are on TR, dont be afraid to climb harder. Also consider finding a mentor or taking some training. Also, dont be afraid to work a route you find difficult.

GabeO wrote: Not for me. The hardest routes I've ever projected successfully are only a letter grade harder than my hardest onsights. And there are routes at that harder grade that I have tried dozens of times, and never done, while I regularly onsight routes just two letter grades easier. I'm very good at sussing out the correct sequence and finding good rests while on a route. Simply put, I climb as hard as I climb. Working a route could never add a number grade to what I can do clean. GO

I assume by dozens of times you mean around 2 dozen at the most?
If so, you haven't even begun to scratch the surface of what projecting means.
My hardest red point is a number grade harder than my hardest onsight (on bolts anyway). I accomplished this through 60-70 attempts on the route. (the last 54 came by 3 attempts per day, 3 days per week, for 6 weeks). Talking to some of my sporto friends, even this doesn't really compare to some project climb efforts.
Not trying to say anything other than I bet you could do it too, although not everyone is in to this kind of thing.

Brian wrote:I can climb as hard as Chris Sharma. I just do it on easier routes.

Best comment so far!

climbing.com/exclusive/base…

i like the part about "climbing hard is all about failing"

Maybe 5.0........... If I'm wearing my 6" heels and a miniskirt.....

Darren in Vegas wrote: I assume by dozens of times you mean around 2 dozen at the most? If so, you haven't even begun to scratch the surface of what projecting means. My hardest red point is a number grade harder than my hardest onsight (on bolts anyway). I accomplished this through 60-70 attempts on the route. (the last 54 came by 3 attempts per day, 3 days per week, for 6 weeks). Talking to some of my sporto friends, even this doesn't really compare to some project climb efforts. Not trying to say anything other than I bet you could do it too, although not everyone is in to this kind of thing.

You're right, I mean a couple dozen. Doing the above sounds completely ludicrous to me. Sorry, just not my thing.

But that wasn't really the point. If I can't do something in a couple dozen attempts, I think that pretty clearly shows that I'm not strong enough to do it. Now if I worked a route as much as you say above, that's really getting into the area where you're physically training for the route, on the route. You're actually doing strength training in situ, for the specific moves required on that route.

GO

What a ridiculous post. Who cares? Grades are numbers arbitrarily attached to chunks of rock that we like to pretend to be proficient at ascending using our hands and feet.

How hard do people really climb? As hard as they climb. That's how hard. There is no number that can single-handedly determine how hard someone climbs, or how accomplished they are. Climbing is a journey, not a destination. People always want to put climbing flair on their sweater vests so they can feel superior to everyone else around them, and it's mind-boggingly stupid, and nothing more than a terrible case of grade seeking.

Someone could tell you they bagged a fun 5.7 last weekend and people would think them a beginner. Then they might mention it was the East Ridge of Mt. Temple in the Canadian Rockies - a serious alpine route that usually takes around 18 hours to complete.

Notice it wasn't the grade the made the climb difficult but rather the style of climbing, along with a hundred other ambiguous factors that actually determined how serious, challenging, or rewarding the climb was?

Stop trying to pigeon hole a sport as fragmented as rock climbing. It's not about any one thing, who cares if some dude says they climb 5.12? What does that even mean? The only people who actually care are armchair surfers anyways. When someone redpoints their first 10a in the gym, that is a great accomplishment for them, or any aspiring climber. So is completing a long and exposed 5.6 alpine route. So is bagging your first 11a sport lead, so is bagging your first onsite 12a. Climbing is a "to each his own" sport. If you want to live and die on what "Grade of climber" you are, then go do bouldering comps. That is about the only place anyone actually gives a shit.

The reason I am so in love with climbing is because things grades, stereotypes, macho-attitudes and personal egos ultimately mean absolutely nothing. It's you, it's the rock, it's your personal journey. Approach it in your own way, in your own time, and it will be rewarding.

Jonathan Coe wrote:What a ridiculous post. Who cares? Grades are numbers arbitrarily attached to chunks of rock that we like to pretend to be proficient at ascending using our hands and feet. How hard do people really climb? As hard as they climb. That's how hard. There is no number that can single-handedly determine how hard someone climbs, or how accomplished they are. Climbing is a journey, not a destination. People always want to put climbing flair on their sweater vests so they can feel superior to everyone else around them, and it's mind-boggingly stupid, and nothing more than a terrible case of grade seeking. Someone could tell you they bagged a fun 5.7 last weekend and people would think them a beginner. Then they might mention it was the East Ridge of Mt. Temple in the Canadian Rockies - a serious alpine route that usually takes around 18 hours to complete. Notice it wasn't the grade the made the climb difficult but rather the style of climbing, along with a hundred other ambiguous factors that actually determined how serious, challenging, or rewarding the climb was? Stop trying to pigeon hole a sport as broad, personal, technical and laid back as climbing. Redpointing your first 10a in the gym is a great accomplishment for any aspiring climber. So is doing a severe 5.6 alpine route. So is bagging your first 11a sport lead, so is bagging your first onsite 12a. The reason I am so in love with climbing is because grades, stereotypes, macho-attitudes and personal egos ultimately mean absolutely nothing. It's you, it's the rock, it's your personal journey. Approach it in your own way, in your own time, and it will be rewarding.

Aaaaaaaand end thread

I've been climbing for a while, only seriously for 2 or 3 years, and I am not even close to being a "12 climber".

I think to be a 12 climber means that if i walk up to a 12 of a wide variety of styles/techniques/protect-ability that I would feel very confident in myself. That can take a long time for some people, the mental aspect is still something I need a lot of work on (that and dropping down below that 200 mark).

I'd very much like to climb 12s, it will free up a lot of routes that I would otherwise not have the opportunity of enjoying. Climbing such and such grade to me is more for the gym, whenever I get outside I'm just giddy to have the chance to climb any ole rocks and be outside with some buddies. Then again I only get outside 25 or so times a year, so the perspective of the truly dedicated climber is probably different

Locker wrote:I have always found it interesting and funny as shit how many times I have seen "5.12" climbers have great difficulty leading "Double Cross" in JTree.

Who cares? Does that make you feel better about yourself?

Locker wrote:"Who cares? Does that make you feel better about yourself?" Like I said, I have always found it funny watching supposed 5.12 climbers have great difficulty climbing "Double Cross". Pretty simple really. Doesn't seem to me like something worth you getting your panties bunched up into your crack. QUESTION for JonnyPantyWad: Do you know what "Double Cross" is rated? (Before looking it up)

It's kind of hard to believe a real 5.12 climber would struggle on Double Cross. I led it easily my first trip to J Tree, when I was a Gunks (no vertical cracks there) 5.8 climber.

GO