|974 page views|
Entering the fun upper section...
Start as you would for Spitwad but continue straight up. The protection is good all the way, and there are some interesting moves. I think 5.9 is a little mild for the crux. All in all, a fine route that I'd do again.
|By C Miller|
May 20, 2004
Were this crack 80' longer it would be a total classic...that's okay as it's still pretty good. The featured varnish almost makes this route seem like a face route with gear at times.
|By Guy H.|
From: Fort Collins CO
Mar 24, 2007
I thought this crack was just as fun and the highly starred routes to the right. It is an easy 5.9 with good gear.
|By Colin Parker|
From: Idyllwild, CA
May 26, 2009
I'll one up Guy and say that I felt this route was actually better than Young Lust and Smithereens. Even the wide section in the middle is somewhat interesting. Definitely do this route if you're in the area. Unfortunately I didn't find time to do Spitwad next door, but it looks amazing too!
|By Chris Owen|
From: La Crescenta and Big Bear Lake
Jun 15, 2009
I can vouch for Spitwad; it too is excellent.
From: Palm Desert, CA
Apr 4, 2010
Great route... not sure that I liked it as much as Young Lust, but definitely enjoyed it more than Smithereens. A must do!
|By Tim Wolfe|
From: Salt Lake City, UT
Mar 21, 2012
Every route on this wall is fantastic. Do them all. Hidden gems.
|By John Ely|
Dec 2, 2012
'Socrates: Whereas what is pleasing to the gods is pleasing to them just because they love it, such being its nature and its cause. Its being loved of the gods is not the reason of its being loved.
Euthyphro: You are right.
Socrates: But suppose, dear Euthyphro, that what is pleasing to the gods and what is holy were not two separate things. In that case if holiness were loved because it was holy, then also what was pleasing to the gods would be loved because it pleased them. And, on the other hand, if what was pleasing to them pleased because they loved it, then also the holy would be holy because they loved it. But now you see that it is just the opposite, because the two are absolutely different fro each other. ...Consequently, Euthyphro, it looks as if you had not given me my answer - as if when you were asked to tell me the nature of the holy you did not wish to explain the essence of it...'