(Climb the funky yellow corners on the right side of Upper Security Risk.) This route is amazing. Since it was retrobolted in 1994, it's a rare opportunity to climb a route that must have been damn scary to lead on trad gear. In fact even with bolts, the climbing is insecure and technical enough to get a little concerned, especially near the top as the pump kicks in and you have to step up onto a technical slab. Definitely harder than many of the newer 12a routes in the canyon, it has the quality of climbs such as The Ticket or Jolt Cola. Definitely a must-do route.
I agree with Peter on this one. Great route, tough throughout, solid for the grade. Also having never seen Peter Beal write so many sentences about a route, it must be a good one! (Just Kidding Peter)
I think most 5.11 sport climbers would have a pretty hard time with this one. Does anyone know how Randy Leavitt did this one? I'm guessing it wasn't ground up.
I don't know how this route was worked originally, but I would say that it probably would not be climbed often if still a trad route. My understanding was the FA gave permission for the retro bolting. This must have been one hell of a lead on gear.......
The reason I asked how it was done is to find out if it was originally worked on TR, pro placed on TR, etc. There is a world of difference between true ground-up climbing and headpointing and plenty of so-called trad routes relied on these tactics without explicitly mentioning their use. In some ways I agree that the route should have been left unbolted but I doubt anyone would ever do it these days. In part this is because it isn't hard enough to attract the attention of most climbers who would want to take the risk. It would become a museum piece instead, looked at but rarely climbed. Again that could be a good thing but I have to say I prefer the hypocrisy of leading a once-scary route on bolts and admiring the skill of the FA to hassling over a TR setup for a single 12a pitch with a 30 minute uphill approach. Most people, myself included, wouldn't bother.
The problem with keeping a route like this in the original style is the FA party had a hammer and placed heads and a marginal pin or 2. So even though a very dangerous lead for the FA, the gear was adequate. But the climb only gets more dangerous for subsequent ascents over time as the fixed gear erodes.
A similar example is the style of the FA of Stratosphere and Air Voyage in the Black where Coyne and/or Leavitt placed marginal fixed gear (poor quarter inch bolts, heads, etc) with a hammer for the FA gear (and on rappel by the way). This is a style of FA that provides adequate pro for the FA team and really just sandbags future ascentionists.
Hot Flyer is a classic sport climb, and although I hate to see trad routes retrobolted, it seems to work in this instance.
I appreciate the value of a true hard trad climb, and hate to see these all retro bolted. I agree that marginal fixed gear (such as questionable pins and copperheads) makes for a daring lead for the FA, but is really silly and irresponsible for future climbers as this type of lead does not use soley clean gear. As such, adding bolts does not seem unreasonable. IF the FA had placed all gear on lead, without pins, then I would think differently. I know people are against seeing bolts added to old trad routes, but I hate nothing more than trying to lead a route that relies on pins, that were new and good 20 years ago, but are now crap. Fixed gear is fixed gear whether it is bolts or pitons.
I have no problem with retrobolting if the 1st ascentionist gave his permission, although the bolt at the crux seems poorly positioned, but I heard a slightly different story. I heard that Randy wasn't asked but that when told it had been bolted he didn't want to make an issue of it. It's true that if it hadn't been retrobolted it wouldn't get as many ascents but so what? The people who would do the route, and there are those people around, would have a different experience than just ticking another .12a, they would probably feel the quality more intensely. Why should those who value that quality be deprived? If you want to toprope it it can be accessed via PLAN B, so that's not an absurd idea. I know somebody who doesn't know any better will trot out that old line about how you don't have to clip the bolts.....at the very least my experience has been that it's like seeing a movie and somebody who's seen it already is describing the plot out loud behind me. The annoyance factor spoils the show. Having a running monologue in your ear about the bolts and 'whether to clip it' and 'can you skip it' just isn't conducive to focussing on the climbing. There is a large number of routes around here that would have been excellent with a few bolts but are quite forgettable at their over-bolted lower standard.
This is the best route at the crag, but could have been better. **
My understanding of this situation is thus: Randy was asked if some bolts could be added to the climb to make it safer, and was agreeable in the matter. When later hearing just how many bolts were added he was/is somewhat dismayed.
Perhaps with a few less bolts it would still have a degree of commitment but still be safe, as opposed to yet another mindless clip-up of which there are plenty around.
AC - Your not the only one who feels that way. You should get your hands on a copy of "Me and the truth of Bolted Canyon," by M. Roly Poly, esq. A good read and history of route development in Boulder Canyon
Removing the bolts from this line is a terrible disservice to the climbing community. Hot Flyer was certainly a bold ascent by Randy, and re-equiping the line was a good contribution by Mark. The bolts are well placed.
The self righteous should be constructive, not destructive. Focus your energy on putting up new bold lines. You can write them up and then everyone will still know how hard core you are.
I just want to clarify that I do not favor bolting existing trad routes. I might even bust out the crowbar if I saw bolts on Arm's Bizarre. However, I agree with AC that the circumstances with Hot Flyer are different, and these bolts are not so disturbing. If Randy were to pull the bolts, I would be bummed, but that would be his right, and no one else's. I understand the debate and the fear of setting a precedant by not condoning this. However, pulling the bolts on this route is disservice to the entire climbing community. Peace.
After thinking about this overnight, I came to the conclusion that it really doesn't matter that much to me (personally), because I've already done it many times, and this is just another case of climber against climber over relatively trivial issues.
If Randy returned Hot Flyer to its pre-bolted state, I'd have a new objective to try. Although I doubt I'd ever have the mind to do it on lead, Steve's suggestion to top-rope the route is fair enough and something I could accept.
If someone else removes the bolts, I question their authority. If the person is not the first ascentionist, then they have no right to remove bolts unless they represent the greater intrests of the climbing community. To often, self-righteous individuals disregard the intrests of their community and destroy something valuable that many enjoyed. Bolt wars, the ice flows, .... etc. These acts are selfish and ego driven.
If the Boulder climbing community supported the pre-bolt Hot Flyer, I'd be OK with returning it to its original state. However, it is my opinion that this is not the case with Hot Flyer, and only a very few outspoken individuals are making this an issue and will do a disservice to the community by removing the bolts.
So when you say that only the FA-ist can remove bolts, you give permission for anyone else to place them, in effect... you see, if I go place them, they get to stay until the FA party returns under your rule.So when Fred Becky dies, can someone rebolt everything he ever did? Some day Chinard, Robbins, Ament, Erikson, etc... they will all be gone. Under this system of 'only the FA party can remove a bolt' you have to start with only the FA party can place one, or eventually anything can be bolted and never stripped.
Sometimes it is not about ideals, or even right and wrong, sometimes it is about gaging the probable end result. In this case, 'only the FA party can remove' is not acceptable.
I agree that the bolt protecting the crux at the lip of the roof is not in the best place.The bolt is placed such that the carabiner on the rope end of a short quickdraw rests against the lip of the roof. There's pretty big whipper potential here, especially once you commit to the insecure moves on the slab, and big falls could cross load the biner, open the gate, etc... if you use a short draw. Use a long (more than 6 inch) quickdraw here.
This route's kind of a sandbag at 11+, compared to similarly graded routes in the Canyon.
By Paul Hunnicutt From: Boulder, CO Nov 9, 2008 rating: 5.12a
To make it even more 'safe' you can place a red Alien in a small pod at the jugs between bolt 3 and 4 eliminating a big swing right if you fall clipping the 4th bolt. Also a #4 Camalot and a green Alien protects the climbing to reach the first bolt if you come straight up from the tree. The #4 is really just to protect going through the choss to get to the green Alien. You probably can fifth class it in from the right as well. Excellent climb on solid rock.
I had a totally rewarding experience without risking life and limb. I would have a difficult time TR'ing this as I'm not sure how easily I could put up Plan B. You still actually have to make all the crux moves on this climb even if bolt to bolting. It isn't a climb where the crux moves can be had below the bolt.
Where do you draw the line on claiming a line (which is debatable itself)? If the FA had free soloed this line are we all SOL? Rap hammering copperheads? This is trad climbing???
I just recently stumbled onto this thread about Hot Flyer. I am glad everyone has enjoyed the route and that brings me happiness.
Before the first ascent, I rapped from the top to see if there was actually a line there. Dan Hare was kind enough to show me this crag and I had already been to the top. On rappel, I could see there was enough protection, except for the roof. While hanging on the rope, I decided to place the fixed copperheads below the roof. My background was that bolts were to be avoided, so the copperheads seemed justified. I did not try the climb or rehearse it on top rope. My rappel was merely to establish that there was a line there worth risking my ass for. I came back with a double rope belay (and two belayers). I believe Harrison Decker and Dan Hare were with me. I led the route, probably without falls (because I don't remember any). I thought it was scary, but reasonable. On a subsequent trip, Harrison made the second lead and I photographed him. I recall, he did fall once above the roof (heads held), but got it clean on his second go.
There are a lot of well thought out comments from the folks who post here. I know several of you and have tremendous respect for you (Bob and Chris).
That era was a time in Boulder when a lot of talented climbers were putting up routes that had been previously overlooked in the Golden Years of Boulder climbing development. Skip Guerin was the most talented and boldest of the lot. Alec Sharp, Jeff Achey, Harrison Decker and Bob Horan were also very motivated and talented. Of course there were Jim Collins and Roger Briggs, who were still active. Anyway, I was proud of Hot Flyer, even though my rappel inspection and copperheads were not perfect style. The comment one of you guys made about fixed copperheads being good for the FA and not for later parties is true, unless the copperheads are beat into the shape of a stopper and wedged into place. That was not the case here. The heads were not that good, even for me.
Maybe a year or two later, a top Brit climber, Andy Parkin, tried Hot Flyer. I was told he fell above the heads and almost decked when the heads blew (that might be a 60 foot fall). So he almost died.
Years later, Mark Rolofson called me and asked if he could retrobolt Hot Flyer. I remembered Andy Parkin. Who would rap back in to replace the fixed heads? Should a bolt go there instead? In this case, Hot Flyer was a perfect candidate for retrobolting. In fact, I thought it would be selfish of me to say no to Mark.
Rolofson was opening the fantastic route for everyone to enjoy. I tell people if they want the thrill, do Limits Of Power, which is safer than Hot Flyer ever was.
The lesson I learned is that every scary route doesn't have to stay that way. On the other hand, I would not want to see all scary, classic routes bolted (like Jules Verne). I think it shows a reasonable compromise by the FA team to let some of them be bolted. Bottom line is that many more people have enjoyed this awesome route.
I hope to return soon to climb this route again, but clipping the bolts (jeez, like the 30 year anniversary or something). I haven't done Hot Flyer since that FA. I assume Rolofson did a good job on the bolts because he is probably good at that craft. Thanks Mark. And thanks to all of you who commented on this route.
Great line on a spectacular crag! With all the recent comments and photos from guys like Randy and Bob Horan, this website is in danger of becoming respectable.
By adam brink From: Boulder, CO Jan 9, 2009 rating: 5.11d
Does anyone know about the route Limits of Power that Randy mentioned? Thanks!
This is a great route and well worth getting on. I agree the climb is solid for the grade. The chains seem to be very rusty at the top and may be ready for a change.
RSS Feed
Slideshow
