Question for the Brits

This is a question for Brits who are climbing or have climbed in the US. Can you grade some classic US climbs from a few different areas (Yosemite, JT, Red Rock, City of Rocks, Eldorado, Gunks, the New, etc, etc) in the British system equivalents? For example Supercrack at Indian Creek is solid 5.l0 - what would it be in British grades in both the adjective and technical grades, in this case E1 5b??? etc.

Background for my question. I have some British guidebooks for the Anti Atlas of Morocco and am going there in a few days and I'm still working on my understanding the British system. Calibrating it against a few classic US climbs would be a big help.

thanks,

Mike Engle wrote:This is a question for Brits who are climbing or have climbed in the US. Can you grade some classic US climbs from a few different areas (Yosemite, JT, Red Rock, City of Rocks, Eldorado, Gunks, the New, etc, etc) in the British system equivalents? For example Supercrack at Indian Creek is solid 5.l0 - what would it be in British grades in both the adjective and technical grades, in this case E1 5b??? etc. Background for my question. I have some British guidebooks for the Anti Atlas of Morocco and am going there in a few days and I'm still working on my understanding the British system. Calibrating it against a few classic US climbs would be a big help. thanks,

However, keep in mind the British trad grade does not directly translate to the YDS system because the British trad grade takes into account danger in the grade and YDS does not.

Mike, you might like to read the essay on grades at:
people.bath.ac.uk/dac33/hig…

this includes a discussion on the UK grading system.

If you haven't used it before it can feel a bit strange but the basic idea is that as many climbs as possible given a set grade can be climbed by climbers who climb that grade. This is akin to a system that might say a 5.7X, 5.8R, and a safe 5.9 are all equivalent. Although it also includes, like the French system, how sustained the climbing is. So I guess many of the cracks at Indian Creek might get bumped up a grade.

For trad it is the best system IMHO. This is because it attempts to handle one of the main issues with trad - the protection. It also means that if you bolt a route its grade might fall drastically. This stops people bolting routes, which is important for a small island with not a lot of rock.

Well, it is no surprise that a British climber would like the British system, but really...The main flaw, in my opinion, is mixing up the continuousness of the route with its protectability in the E-grade. Of course, people used to this system have learned the appropriate tea-leaf-reading-Delphic-Oracle-consulting skills to sort out what the numbers are trying to say, but all you have to do is read David's linked essay to see just how Byzantine the system is, and how the parameters have to be juggled in various indirect ways to try to convey the nature of the climb.

The Brits I've known criticize the decimal system because it doesn't really distinguish between sustained routes and routes with short difficult cruxes. The British system purports to do that, but it really doesn't because mixed in with the sustained part of the grade is some estimate of the level of protection. So is it sustained with good protection, or less sustained but with bad protection? Add to that the fact that the E-part is an onsight grade and the technical part is a redpoint grade and then what do you have?

For additional hilarity, read the similarly convoluted account at thebmc.co.uk/a-brief-explan…
and then note the final proviso:

Niall Grimes wrote:And the final point is that these rules are broken more often than they are obeyed, so use this explanation only as a guide, and stay open minded.

In other words, disregard all the complicated stuff I just said.

Gotta love the concatenation of opposing adjectives too, like mild very severe---classic! You need a longer pause between mild and very than between very and severe in order of it to sound remotely meaningful. Or do the Brits say things like "I love you mild very much"? I know they've always struggled with the English language. I mean, calling a truck a lorry? Who in their right mind would do that?

Having heaped as much scorn as possible on our benighted (meant in two senses) brethren's difficulty ratings, I do find it intriguing to find that in some sense the system tries to grade the climber as much as the climb. And if the system really holds the bolters at bay because the grade goes down as the protection goes up, I'm really all for it after all.

I do not think the British grading system is designed to prevent bolting ..but on and off I have climbed in the UK for many years and I still find it a complete puzzle more so the E grading.I think you will enjoy Morocco lots of good climbing around the 5.8 range.

Thanks for the info and feedback.

Here is another good link that discusses British Climbing grades:

thebmc.co.uk/a-brief-explan…

I (mostly) get the concept of the British system but I still am interested in the calibration of seeing a few US classic climbs converted to the British grading system.

Of course very shortly I will be immersed in the British system in use at Tafraout and will come back with a damn good calibration. Really looking forward to the climbing holiday. We leave tomorrow and should be climbing by Tuesday.

If anyone is interested in a cool winter climbing destination:
climb-tafraout.com/

Cheers!

Plenty of Brits climb in Yosemite. Head over to UKClimbing.com and ask them to grade the classics they've done there.

USBRIT wrote:I do not think the British grading system is designed to prevent bolting ..but on and off I have climbed in the UK for many years and I still find it a complete puzzle more so the E grading.I think you will enjoy Morocco lots of good climbing around the 5.8 range.

It wasn't designed to prevent bolting, it predates sports climbing, but this is one impact it has had.

When doing a new route you get a choice: leave it as trad and claim an E9 or add a bolt just before the crux and claim an E6. People tend to opt for the former.

Mike, I'm only familiar with Yosemite which translates quite poorly to UK grades since the climbing styles are so different. Eldorado Canyon might be a more useful comparison but I've not climbed there.

After Six 5.7 - VS 4c
Royal Arches 5.7 A0 - VS 4c
Snake Dike 5.7 - HVS 4c
Nurdle 5.8 - HVS 5a
Commitment 5.9 - HVS 5b
Nutcracker 5.8 - HVS 5a
Regular Route Fairview 5.9 - HVS+ 5a
The Caverns 5.8 - E1 5a
Braille Book 5.8 - E1 5a
Central Pillar of Frenzy 5.9 - E1 5b
East Buttress El Cap. 5.10a - E1 5b
Reed's Direct 5.10a - E1+ 5b
Stone Groove 5.10b - E1+ 5c
Stoveleg Cracks 5.10c - E2 5c
Lunatic Fringe 5.10c - E2 5c
NW Buttress Higher 5.9 - E2 5b
Steck-Salathe 5.10b - E2+ 5b
Freewheelin' 5.9 R - E3 5b
Serenity Crack 5.10d - E3 5c
Butterfingers 5.11a - E3 6a
The Enema 5.11b - E3+ 5c
Crack A Go Go - 5.11c - E4 6a
Butterballs 5.11c - E4+ 6a
Rostrum 5.11c - E4+ 6a
Separate Reality 5.12a - E5 6b
Crimson Cringe 5.12a - E5 6a
Space Babble 5.11a R - E5 6a
Astroman 5.11c - E5 6b

Edit:
Crimson Crysalis 5.8 - HVS 5a
Black Orpheus 5.10a - HVS 5a
Dream of Wild Turkeys 5.10a - E1 5b

rgold wrote:Well, it is no surprise that a British climber would like the British system, but really...The main flaw, in my opinion, is mixing up the continuousness of the route with its protectability in the E-grade.

It isn't complex, honest! We just love making it sound complex. The problem is with the tech grade part. Just ignore it. I think it should never have been added as it takes some of the adventure out.

And Mild Very Difficult sounds much better than 5.3 or French 2b. It speaks of tweed, pipes and boots with nails.

David Coley wrote: It isn't complex, honest! We just love making it sound complex. The problem is with the tech grade part. Just ignore it. I think it should never have been added as it takes some of the adventure out. And Mild Very Difficult sounds much better than 5.3 or French 2b. It speaks of tweed, pipes and boots with nails.

Yes, I was just kidding, but no, I still don't really get it. And there is no question the Mild Very Difficult is ever so much tweedier than 5.3, which speaks of nothing more than decrepit McDonald's arches in some decaying western town bypassed by US 80. Pip pip old chap!

Duncan - thanks, very insightful.

rgold wrote: but no, I still don't really get it.

Here's my best shot.
Imagine the collection of rock routes in the USA that can be climbed by, but only by, 25% of the climbing population. In the British system these all get the same grade. Some will have hard moves above good gear, some will be easier but with poor gear etc., some very simple but on loose rock. They are all equally hard, as only 25% of the climbing population can climb them, but they are hard in different ways.

Imagine that grade is called E2.

If a Brit says "I lead E2" she means she can on-sight most E2s on most rock types, angles, and pro . This should be contrasted with the statements like, "I climb 5.10b. But only on well protected, granite slabs". To a Brit this means "you don't climb 5.10b".

As I'm sure you know, for sport routes we simply use French grades.

The trad system seems complicated but it in reality is very flexible and know what to expect from most routes by just looking at the grade.

For example, at the moment I am climbing around E1 on trad, the grade range is pretty much E1 5a, E1 5b and E1 5c. Without any other info I would assume the E1 5a has fairly easy/soft moves but has limited protection, E1 5b would just be 'standard' E1 and E1 5c would be a well-protected climb with harder moves.

Guidebooks usually note if rock is suspect, or any other special considerations