Adding Bolts between runouts

chuff,

I'm impressed by the introspectiveness of your response.

The BY is the last line I would want to see bolts added to because it has seen subsequent ascents. So, it has stood the test of time as being something worth taking a risk on for people that aspire to that sort of experience.

I take issue with the routes with no second ascent, that have a bolt or two, and the FA has proclaimed that is only place they could find stances to drill. Often these developers also put up 10s and 9s, but couldn't find stances for non-death bolts spacing, even though it is less steep with bigger holds? oh, but 12s? we'll needs hooks for those.

So yeah, my central issue is with the ego of the FAs of that generation. What they did was ballsy, for sure. But because of the medium of the slab world, it is the ego of the climber that determines
the level of pro, not the rock.

I guess you are correct: putting the ego of the FA on a pedestal instead of creating a route with a reasonable margin of survival is my issue with hero worship. That was a choice they made and now and forever that rock is locked into that mentality.

I don't think everything should be a sport climb, but I also don't think singular, ego-driven ascents that haven't seen a second ascent in 30 years are valid today either.... and putting this type of ascent on a holy 'trad' pedestal needs to be rethought.

David I applaud you for the thoughtful post. I hope we can all agree that there is a time and place for run out slab climbs, especially established routes such as BY and other Tuolumne classics, Stone Mountain, etc... Just as there is a time and place for run out gear leads such as Air Sweden at the creek or Gaia in the UK. As well there is a time and place for highball boulder problems that push the limits of sanity, of which there are many here in Bishop.

But at the same time I definitely agree with you that certain routes are pretty bogus, such as Bachar's solos in Tuolumne that are absolutely unprotectable yet he expected everyone to leave them as solos forever since that was the style of the first ascent. Not a reasonable expectation IMO. Same with rappel bolted death routes, or chosspiles that have faded into complete obscurity and/or never seen a second ascent due to the fact that no one wants to climb them in their current state. I even have issue with old manky fixed pins which were bomber when placed by the FA but are worthless now. Why not replace those with a nice new bolt just like you might due with an old 1/4" buttonhead?

Still time this brings up the question of where exactly do you draw the line? I think we all agree that you don't retro bolt BY or other classic runout slabs, you dont add bolts to established traditional climbs even if run out, and you don't bolt established highball boulders into mini sport routes. So how do you decide what it's ok to add fixed protection to?

This is why i think the prevailing ethics and history of an area as well as community consensus both need to be taken into consideration, and to err on the side of not adding bolts if there is any question at all of whether its ok or not. As Locker said way way up thread, at certain specific times it might be ok, but usually no.

Good talk. Consensus seems to be quality of the route should dictate and allow for some leeway one way or the other

Whoa whoa! No need for name calling you cheeky monkey, you. I must have missed the part where you offered your name. No matter. With that impressive list of 5.8 and 5.9 Rs, you can let your climbing prowess speak for you. And you missed one thing too I'm afraid. The part where I advocated runout routes as long as they are of high quality. Not so sure why my comments have you "a bit miffed", but please rest assured, kind sir, that I shall concede on any future points, whether you get them or not. It has become painfully obvious to me, that because of your giant sack, any physical contest between us would result in my efforts being thwarted quite easily by you.

Tavis brought up an interesting problem, that of replacing old manky pins with bolts. This makes me think of one unique and particular route crux, which I am sure can be applied to other situations. Essentially, you traverse 20 feet with marginal protection, and clip an old pin about a foot below your feet. Although the pin looks okay, I'm sure that it will not be for ever. Also, the pin placement/scar will not take protection. This is hypothetical since you can actually place marginal, but probably adequate micro-gear right at the crux, which is one move above the end of the traverse, but lets say that there is no gear, and the old pin is crap. Do you replace the pin with a bolt? If you do, do you place the bolt where the pin is (clipping below your feet)? That would be stupid. Or, do you place the bolt at chest level off of the traverse, which would completely change the character of the route, as you would be essentially top-roping the crux move. If you do replace pins (assuming there is no other natural pro), do you place a bolt where the pin is (dictated by the rock), or do you place a bolt where it makes sense to have one?

David Sahalie wrote:I don't think everything should be a sport climb, but I also don't think singular, ego-driven ascents that haven't seen a second ascent in 30 years are valid today either.... and putting this type of ascent on a holy 'trad' pedestal needs to be rethought.

+1

As for the replacement question, I think it's time to catch up with the modern standard...
https://www.thebmc.co.uk/is-there-a-future-for-pegs-in-british-climbing
"Replace pegs with bolts: this is what is done in much of Europe, and in some ways is the obvious solution. In traditionally bolt-free areas the majority of climbers would be firmly against this though."

Tavis Ricksecker wrote:David I applaud you for the thoughtful post. I hope we can all agree that there is a time and place for run out slab climbs, especially established routes such as BY and other Tuolumne classics, Stone Mountain, etc... Just as there is a time and place for run out gear leads such as Air Sweden at the creek or Gaia in the UK. As well there is a time and place for highball boulder problems that push the limits of sanity, of which there are many here in Bishop. But at the same time I definitely agree with you that certain routes are pretty bogus, such as Bachar's solos in Tuolumne that are absolutely unprotectable yet he expected everyone to leave them as solos forever since that was the style of the first ascent. Not a reasonable expectation IMO. Same with rappel bolted death routes, or chosspiles that have faded into complete obscurity and/or never seen a second ascent due to the fact that no one wants to climb them in their current state. I even have issue with old manky fixed pins which were bomber when placed by the FA but are worthless now. Why not replace those with a nice new bolt just like you might due with an old 1/4" buttonhead? Still time this brings up the question of where exactly do you draw the line? I think we all agree that you don't retro bolt BY or other classic runout slabs, you dont add bolts to established traditional climbs even if run out, and you don't bolt established highball boulders into mini sport routes. So how do you decide what it's ok to add fixed protection to? This is why i think the prevailing ethics and history of an area as well as community consensus both need to be taken into consideration, and to err on the side of not adding bolts if there is any question at all of whether its ok or not. As Locker said way way up thread, at certain specific times it might be ok, but usually no.

I can assure you that much of the BY is not a slab.

Jared Moore wrote:So, I am wondering...what are the ethics of adding a bolt in between large runouts? Is it a bad thing to make a route safer for someone to try, so that the risk of taking a bad whipper or even decking isn't as high? I realize that some climbs are so easy and putting bolts there can sometimes be silly, however, why have runouts on 10s or harder? I would appreciate only serious constructive comments...

OT, but you live in Tahoma? Where at? I lived on Elm street for 4 years. Moved away to a different state about 15 years ago.

Jon Clark wrote: I can assure you that much of the BY is not a slab.

Well, yes, I realize this. My lazy writing is to blame, not my ignorance. So let's say instead "There is a place for run out bolted face climbs which were put up ground up on lead by the first ascensionist with or without the assistance of hooks."

;)

George, how right you are. I would never advocate a bolt on Aviary...I think that it is completely safe with natural pro, but I could see a similar scenario in other situations where replacing a pin at the pin site would be kind of silly, but placing a bolt logically would change the character of the route.

BTW Jon amazing send. Though I have no desire to attempt that feat, I am glad the route is there for others to experience.

Wow 8 pages of worthless drivel . So the now generation speaks. Glad I wasn't your dad cuz the moment you were born I would have drown you in the toilet and told your mom to sell the milk.

Make it safer , I say if you want it safe maybe your in the wrong sport . Perhaps you should take up video gaming , or curling . Or just stay in the gym where it's nice n safe.

Truth about climbing is this , nobody but you gives two shits what or how hard you climb ! Nobody ! So why get so worked up over it. If anyone of you were so badass then this whole 8 pages would be moot . And here would be the answer with out all the whinny justifications as to why it should/ shouldn't be .

"If a bolt was never placed then , it shouldn't be now "....pretty simple eh.

iceman777 wrote:Wow 8 pages of worthless drivel . So the now generation speaks. Glad I wasn't your dad cuz the moment you were born I would have drown you in the toilet and told your mom to sell the milk. Make it safer , I say if you want it safe maybe your in the wrong sport . Perhaps you should take up video gaming , or curling . Or just stay in the gym where it's nice n safe. Truth about climbing is this , nobody but you gives two shits what or how hard you climb ! Nobody ! So why get so worked up over it. If anyone of you were so badass then this whole 8 pages would be moot . And here would be the answer with out all the whinny justifications as to why it should/ shouldn't be . "If a bolt was never placed then , it shouldn't be now "....pretty simple eh. Dave& Chuff you guys clearly need to go fu@@ each other maybe throw VA in the mix While your at it . Just get it over with. Then get over yourselves .

That is a great post! No worthless drivel there. Thank you, IceMAN777, for telling us what a real man thinks. My balls just swelled 3.7 sizes because I read that. You are a stud.

iceman777 wrote:Glad I wasn't your dad cuz the moment you were born I would have drown you in the toilet and told your mom to sell the milk.

iceman777 wrote: So why get so worked up over it.

LOL. Yeah. You're not worked up at all.

You're right. I apologize. I shall do as YOU command because I need to get over myself.

I understand. You don't like me, because I'm dangerous. Is that what you're trying to say here?

It's cazy that so many MP'er are actually discussing an issue and agree on it. There are clearly climbs that should never be re bolted because they are awesome as they are, even if they are extremely dangerous.

Then there are pieces if crap climbs that need to be cleaned up, and beating your chest over the issue only announces to the rest of the community that you are tradadabani who lacks the experience to understand this.

Tradition is not an argument in a rational system, but who said climbers were rational.

It's just damn depressing that the irrational ones try to hold the rational ones to ridiculous standards, creating crazy diatribes about how skipping bolts makes you cry and isn't rad. I think it's more rad because you are making a choice to be bad ass. My logic actually makes sense, you logic about how you can always clip the bolt" is total bullshit. Don't take the draws you won't clip the bolt, you do know how to count right?

At first I was like: a JQ post that isn't a troll? Then I was like: oh

climbing.com/climber/to-bol…

A good article on the FA making the decision to bolt or not to.

^ So ego trumps desire of community, but self preservation and needs of immediate partner superceeds ego. Interesting.

"Did I personally find the process cheapened because I added the bolt? Yes. But some sacrifices need to be made so your friends don’t have to scoop your brains back into your head."

There is some wisdom in there. In all this haste to experience an R route in its true FA nature, I wonder if we forget to add to the risk side of the risk/reward assessment. This attitude of "Go big, or go home" gets pushed ahead of the idea of going big, and being able to go home afterwards.