Continue with onX Maps
Continue with Facebook
Post Awesome Trad Movies Here
Follow topic:
|
dont know if this has been posted already, but this was entertaining: |
|
Skyline at the City. |
|
^ Nice job finding pro up on that top section. I must've run it out about 20 or 30 feet from the crack to the anchors. |
|
Pat Goodman is the man! |
|
Classic Finger Crack Climbing at Red Rock Canyon: Dave Allfrey climbing Seduction Line 5.12a |
|
Roof Cracks! |
|
New film out about the "Wide Boyz" on cobra crack in squamish. I watched it last night with the lady, worth a watch. |
|
Not trad, more of a head point. And the climber is kind of a douchebag. But still, the NRG is awesome! |
|
Looks rad. I'm not sure I'd be super psyched on some of those moves with low-balls for pro. |
|
^^^that video is awesome, supremely well done. Really captures the essence of the gear climbing experience for everyone, full on! Thanks. |
camhead wrote:Not trad, more of a head point. And the climber is kind of a douchebag. But still, the NRG is awesome! youtube.com/watch?v=k6GWrq8…A proud send for sure, but sometimes I'm a bit confused by when people say something like this "goes on gear". I mean based on the video and the guy's own comments it seems like the only way this route "goes" is if you wire it in on TR, suss out all the moves and placements on TR/rappel, then basically solo the thing and occasionally place extremely marginal gear that barely even holds a slight tug, much less an actual fall. To me that is different in kind to other "headpoints" like the Sonnie Trotter video on The Path where he actually takes a 20+ footer on a black alien on one of his lead attempts before he finally puts it together for the send. IMO, if the pro is so sketchy that it's basically a no-fall scenario the entire climb, it doesn't "go on gear". It just "goes" as a solo and you happen to be able to fidget some widgets in along the way. |
Ryan Watts wrote: A proud send for sure, but sometimes I'm a bit confused by when people say something like this "goes on gear". I mean based on the video and the guy's own comments it seems like the only way this route "goes" is if you wire it in on TR, suss out all the moves and placements on TR/rappel, then basically solo the thing and occasionally place extremely marginal gear that barely even holds a slight tug, much less an actual fall. To me that is different in kind to other "headpoints" like the Sonnie Trotter video on The Path where he actually takes a 20+ footer on a black alien on one of his lead attempts before he finally puts it together for the send. IMO, if the pro is so sketchy that it's basically a no-fall scenario the entire climb, it doesn't "go on gear". It just "goes" as a solo and you happen to be able to fidget some widgets in along the way.Those are all good points, and really encapsulate why I prefer to distinguish headpoints (toproped pre-rehearsal, cleaning, gear sussing), with trad (ground up, onsight, sometimes even avoiding hangdogging). The two styles of climbing require very different head spaces, and are as different from one another as they are from sport climbing or bouldering. However, the pro on this route is not really that sketchy. The ballnut that pops out on pull- testing was bad, not because of the placement itself, but because the ball was bent, and not setting properly on the nut. Once the finicky ballnut was set in the right spot, it was fine. Furthermore, I actually DID fall on the #2 ballnut (the piece that protects the up-and-right deadpoint) twice while working the route. It was good, but still a bit heady, knowing that if it pulled, I'd be taking a very large fall onto an even smaller ballnut. The pro is intricate, but works. This ascent was actually not that different from Trotter's ascent of "The Path," then, with the exception that the FA did not work the route on bolts, then chop them, then lead it on gear. The point that I meant in the video when I emphasized that it was more a headpoint than a true trad lead was that a ground-up, onsight ascent would be reserved for only climbers who are 90% sure they can onsight 5.13 moves over gear that is strenuous to place. There are not too many climbers like that in the world. And a ground-up, onsight, FA? Even fewer. Add to the fact that in order to approach this climb, you walk RIGHT by the top of it, and the idea of doing a trad ascent of this route becomes even more ludicrous. So, short version: this climb was not a roped free-solo with only psychological pro; it was a reasonably safe headpoint even for someone like me, who maxes out at that grade. |
camhead wrote: Those are all good points, and really encapsulate why I prefer to distinguish headpoints (toproped pre-rehearsal, cleaning, gear sussing), with trad (ground up, onsight, sometimes even avoiding hangdogging). The two styles of climbing require very different head spaces, and are as different from one another as they are from sport climbing or bouldering. However, the pro on this route is not really that sketchy. The ballnut that pops out on pull- testing was bad, not because of the placement itself, but because the ball was bent, and not setting properly on the nut. Once the finicky ballnut was set in the right spot, it was fine. Furthermore, I actually DID fall on the #2 ballnut (the piece that protects the up-and-right deadpoint) twice while working the route. It was good, but still a bit heady, knowing that if it pulled, I'd be taking a very large fall onto an even smaller ballnut. The pro is intricate, but works. This ascent was actually not that different from Trotter's ascent of "The Path," then, with the exception that the FA did not work the route on bolts, then chop them, then lead it on gear. The point that I meant in the video when I emphasized that it was more a headpoint than a true trad lead was that a ground-up, onsight ascent would be reserved for only climbers who are 90% sure they can onsight 5.13 moves over gear that is strenuous to place. There are not too many climbers like that in the world. And a ground-up, onsight, FA? Even fewer. Add to the fact that in order to approach this climb, you walk RIGHT by the top of it, and the idea of doing a trad ascent of this route becomes even more ludicrous. So, short version: this climb was not a roped free-solo with only psychological pro; it was a reasonably safe headpoint even for someone like me, who maxes out at that grade.Thanks for the response. I understand the difference between a headpoint (TR rehearsal, pre-inspection, etc.) and ground-up "trad" -- I guess what I was getting at more was the ability of the protection to actually hold a fall, which it sounds like it actually does. From the video, it looked like the pro was sketch to the point of being useless, so it would essentially be a TR-rehearsed solo rather than a "headpoint". Based on your comments, it sounds like it actually does go on gear, which is pretty sweet. P.S. Touche on Sonnie pulling the bolts -- probably not the greatest example of style but it was the first "headpoint video where dude actually whips" that I thought of. I always figured there had to be more to the story of pulling the bolts than it seems, but maybe it really was just like how you say... |
Ryan Watts wrote: I always figured there had to be more to the story of pulling the bolts than it seems, but maybe it really was just like how you say...http://sonnietrotter.com/2007/09/08/path-etic-details/ |
Pat Goodman wrote:https://vimeo.com/96818003That was an awesome looking route! Nice job. Too hard for me, but super inspiring. I can't wait to get out to the NRG this fall. |
|
Nothing serious, just a fun video made with good friends. |
