Retrobolting

Just hang a super long perma draw off bolt 2. Maybe a meter long of Chain, with multiple clipping possibilities so as to accommodate all heights and clipping reaches.

I personally think we should move to this style of bolting anyway and put in less holes and bolts by substituting with super long multi tiered perma draws.

T Roper wrote: They were never considered TRAD routes until sport climbers got on them and crapped themselves.

What nonsense. They weren't considered Trad routes because, before the mid/late '80s, the terms Trad and Sport hadn't been needed to distinguish between two different types of climbs.

There are lots of bold trad climbers who sport climber regularly because it's fun, which is why all of us are out there, isn't it?

In fact I ran into a living-legend the other day, someone well-known for his bold first ascents, sport climbing at a local crag with an old friend. Too bad you weren't there to give him shit about being a pussy sport climber.

John Byrnes wrote: What nonsense. They weren't considered Trad routes because, before the mid/late '80s, the terms Trad and Sport hadn't been needed to distinguish between two different types of climbs. There are lots of bold trad climbers who sport climber regularly because it's fun, which is why all of us are out there, isn't it? In fact I ran into a living-legend the other day, someone well-known for his bold first ascents, sport climbing at a local crag with an old friend. Too bad you weren't there to give him shit about being a pussy sport climber.

Easy there chief, I think u may have misread. Not bagging on sport climbers at all, its just most climbers would shit themselves on the routes, I could have been more clear as to not hurt anyones feelings.

the climb is too hard for you. period. Dont climb it until you can. you have no right to change the climb, it isnt yours.

because of course your opinion is the only one that matters. Perish the thought that there is a person at your local crag who LOVES that sketchy second clip and LOVES making it. Everything should be dumbed down for you, and only you.

John Byrnes wrote: ...Sport climbing, by definition, is supposed to be reasonably safe....

Just becuase it's bolted do not assume it's a "sport" climb. Plenty of bolted lines are "sporty" yet are not sport routes. Don't piss on the ethics of the FA becuase you lack the balls to repeat the route.

tenpins wrote:the climb is too hard for you. period. Dont climb it until you can. you have no right to change the climb, it isnt yours. because of course your opinion is the only one that matters. Perish the thought that there is a person at your local crag who LOVES that sketchy second clip and LOVES making it. Everything should be dumbed down for you, and only you.

gryption wrote:Just becuase it's bolted do not assume it's a "sport" climb. Plenty of bolted lines are "sporty" yet are not sport routes. Don't piss on the ethics of the FA becuase you lack the balls to repeat the route.

Dear Tenpins, Gryption, et al,

I was hoping to have a discussion of the difference between Sport and Trad and what ethics are appropriate to each, but it seems that bigotry* continues to prevent that from happening. Until a rational discussion can be held and some agreements reached, this issue will continue to divide our sport, and provoke climbers and land managers to actions we'd all rather avoid.

I also suggest being more careful with the pronouns "you" and "yours". If you're going to make a personal attack, you might want to first research your target to avoid looking like a fool. At my age and 35 years of climbing, I've earned the right to be less bold than I was, but that doesn't mean I'm not well-acquainted with risk.

So, would anyone else like to be bold and have that discussion, or am I deluding myself thinking it's about time we addressed the issue?

* bigotry: stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own.

The first three bolts on a sport route are the toughest to figure out.

And, its easy to be critical of someone else's work.

There's an enormous amount of sport routes out there that have an interesting bolt spread on the first three clips. Most require a very attentive belayer. All should force a leader to consider the risk prior to launch.

Before changing someone's route, I'd try to have a conversation with them. If they're not around, or, can't be located, moved away, died, etc...then it depends on the crag and community.

I personally wouldn't take it upon myself to change someone's route. But, I have added bolts to my routes, and, have suggested on more than a few occasions that route developers should change their bolt spread, especially in that difficult-to-figure first three bolts.

John Byrnes wrote: Dear Tenpins, Gryption, et al, I was hoping to have a discussion of the difference between Sport and Trad and what ethics are appropriate to each, but it seems that bigotry* continues to prevent that from happening.

Have you considered that perhaps that is precisely the discussion you are getting?
It is within the realm of the possible that your foregone conclusion that the "appropriateness" of different ethics for each is not shared by that many people.

While I don't have your years experience (35), I'm hardly new to the game with about 30, and I'd say that's pretty much in the same league. Hell, I've been arguing with YOU off/on for 25 years (chuckle). As well, I certainly have plenty of qualifications for having "earned the right to be less bold than I was" on several fronts.

But for my own part, I don't view the types of climbing that differently in terms of ethics. Seeing these types of climbing similarly, I'd find it odd if I were told by someone that sees them so differently that it was bigotry on my part. Not that you said it to me, but I'm just sayin'...

Talk to the person who bolted the route and see how they feel about adding or moving a bolt. If the the route equipper is no longer around, try to get consensus from the climbing community and go from there. I have added a bolt to 2 of my own routes because the people that climb them thought it would be nice to have another bolt, not a big deal. If it's sport climbing, the goal is to be safe and if the route is more enjoyable with another bolt added or a bolt moved, then why not.

Tony B wrote: Have you considered that perhaps that is precisely the discussion you are getting? It is within the realm of the possible that your foregone conclusion that the "appropriateness" of different ethics for each is not shared by that many people. While I don't have your years experience (35), I'm hardly new to the game with about 30, and I'd say that's pretty much in the same league. Hell, I've been arguing with YOU off/on for 25 years (chuckle). As well, I certainly have plenty of qualifications for having "earned the right to be less bold than I was" on several fronts. But for my own part, I don't view the types of climbing that differently in terms of ethics. Seeing these types of climbing similarly, I'd find it odd if I were told by someone that sees them so differently that it was bigotry on my part. Not that you said it to me, but I'm just sayin'...

Tony, I wasn't accusing you of bigotry, sorry I wasn't more clear on that. But several of those other guys...

Yes, you and I have been arguing for decades now. I've noticed you've matured during that time, as have I (I hope) ;-)

As far as Sport vs. Trad, I believe there's a bi-modal distribution of climbs between the two definitions. In other words, there's a lot of sport climbs, and a lot of trad climbs, but far fewer intentional Sprad climbs. In my experience many of those Sprad climbs were intended to be Sport but the bolts are in the wrong place.

I see clear differences between the two types of climbing, and clear similarities. So, in my mind, some ethics should be applied to both (eg. chipping), but others not so much.

In the past here on MP, I got tons of shit for supporting comfortizing and extended cleaning of new sport routes. I got shit for supporting top-roping of incipient sport routes to determine where the bolts should go.

I've done a number of trad FA's. We walked up and climbed them, lichen, loose rock, vegetation, using a nut-tool to scrape dirt out of the cracks so we could place gear, and all. That's the trad way, but if someone opens a sport route in that condition they should be vilified and forced to go without beer for a week. (Happened in Rifle last year).

Bolt Wars have been going on for decades too. Doesn't anyone else want to see them resolved, or at least mitigated? Why can't some guidelines be established (It Depends(tm) always applies) that most climbers can agree on without saying "you lack the balls to repeat" it?

Brian in SLC wrote:The first three bolts on a sport route are the toughest to figure out. And, its easy to be critical of someone else's work.

Both true. But someone has to criticize a badly bolted route, no? Or else how are people to learn how to do it right?

Brian in SLC wrote: I personally wouldn't take it upon myself to change someone's route.

I have. I recently spent 6 hrs cleaning and comfortizing someone else's route. I removed approximately 200lbs of loose rock, half of which was a 100lbs block everyone was using for a hand & foothold, 30' directly above the belay. And I got rid of dozens of razor cuts and puncture wounds (I know because I climbed it in its original condition).

Brian in SLC wrote:But, I have added bolts to my routes, and, have suggested on more than a few occasions that route developers should change their bolt spread, especially in that difficult-to-figure first three bolts.

I've added and/or moved bolts on my own routes too. And I've added bolts to others' routes to eliminate 20' ledge-falls and factor-2 falls onto the belay in places where rescue isn't an option.

So I know I'm gonna get tons of shit for admitting that in public. How's that for balls?

Good discussion here. Another point I didn't see made yet is that perhaps that second bolt is where it is because there's no good rock suitable for a bolt between bolts 1 and 2. Often, those that have never done any route development don't consider this because they've never thought about it because they're not out there hammering on the rock and cleaning the route.

Alexey Dynkin wrote:... Or just take out the first one to make it clear that the current #2 should be stick-clipped.

No need to take the first one out to be clear about this. The first bolt can be used a directional or still there and use for a lead protection bolt for those "bold" climbers out there that still hate on stick-clipping (and don't value their ankles as much as I value mine.) As a heavy 6'5" climber that outweighs my belayer by quite a bit, I often stick clip the second bolt. This decision can be left up to the individual climber's evaluate.

John Byrnes wrote: Dear Tenpins, Gryption, et al, I was hoping to have a discussion of the difference between Sport and Trad and what ethics are appropriate to each,... this issue will continue to divide our sport,... I also suggest being more careful with the pronouns "you" and "yours". If you're going to make a personal attack, you might want to first research your target to avoid looking like a fool. At my age and 35 years of climbing, I've earned the right to be less bold than I was,....

Well if YOU want to play the age card with me YOU'LL have to buy a time machine because I got YOU beat. There are many climbs that are going to be out of YOUR ability now that YOU have decided not to take what you feel is an unacceptable risk. Perhapse my time will come but I doubt it. This thread brings to mind a climb near my house at my local crag, it's 5.9+ PG13 and called wait for it..."Cry Now, Cry Later". It has a first bolt that is 40 feet off the ground. Now the first 32 feet are class 4 but you have to perform two 5.9 moves to get to the clip stance. Local tradition repects the ground up onsight flash first assent ethics of the climb by not adding a bolt. Later in the climb you have to perform a 5.9+ sequence on pretty much no feet a bit farther above the last bolt than most would prefer. Are YOU saying that our respect of the FA ground up ethic is misplaced and if so do YOU have anyting besides YOUR own boo hooing to support that claim?

and espousing social norms "an expected form of behavior in a given situation" is not nessasarily bigotry

Jason Halladay wrote:As a heavy 6'5" climber that outweighs my belayer by quite a bit, I often stick clip the second bolt.

Consider that, as 6'5" climber, you might have the OPTION to stick-clip the second bolt a little more often than your 5'2" partner. Just sayin :)

Anyway, I take your point that sometimes low bolts have a purpose even if they seem like they wouldn't protect against a ground fall, but I've also seen plenty of second bolts that are too high to stick-clip, yet too far from the first bolt to prevent a ground fall if you blow the clip. I don't think anyone can argue with the fact that NOT ALL ROUTES ARE SET WELL; the question is: who gets to decide when it is or isn't?

Alexey Dynkin wrote: ... who gets to decide ...

The primary FA. Worried your local rock pile will get developed badly? Buy a drill and man up or get involved in local development so that your opinions can be considered relevant.

gription wrote: The primary FA. Worried your local rock pile will get developed badly? Buy a drill and man up or get involved in local development so that your opinions can be considered relevant.

You're right, my opinion is irrelevant. And a shittily-set route is shitty, completely regardless of it.

Alexey Dynkin wrote: You're right, my opinion is irrelevant. And a shittily-set route is shitty, completely regardless of it.

Look at it from the FA point of view. If you are not a developer than you are a user. I suggest you give back and be heard.

Wait, 15 feet? That's bouldering territory. I'm a sport climber through and through, but come on.

gription wrote: Look at it from the FA point of view. If you are not a developer than you are a user. I suggest you give back and be heard.

So, let me get this straight: if I "give back", is it so that I can have license to have a holier-than-thou attitude toward "users"?

EDITED: As an example: no, I haven't developed routes outside, but I've set gym routes. (insert rant against gym rats here) I know for a fact that it's not that easy or obvious to set one well. However, if someone calls me out on setting one that sucks, I'm not going to tell them that their opinion doesn't matter...I mean, what's the point? Isn't the purpose of me setting the route for OTHER PEOPLE to enjoy? It's called feedback, and I welcome it! Why can't developers outside see it that way?

Alexey Dynkin wrote: So, let me get this straight: if I "give back", is it so that I can have license to have a holier-than-thou attitude toward "users"?

Yes if you are not actice in development I believe your voice is less valuable.