Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
Why Toproping?
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 3 of 7.  <<First   <Prev   1  2  3  4  5   Next>   Last>>
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
 
By Tradoholic
Dec 11, 2012
Austin Baird wrote:
What you just said is that there's no greater satisfaction out of lead climbing than top roping. Your argument is that ANYONE who chooses to lead ONLY does it out of ego or number chasing (which are the same thing) and that there are no valid reasons for sport climbing. I don't have a response to this; it doesn't deserve one. I just wanted to clarify and make sure I understood your point. (PS - did I say ANYWHERE in my post what grade I climbed or that I was interested in leading in order to push my numbers? If you can point out a single statement that could plausibly be construed as "number chasing", I'll send you a six pack of your favorite soda (I'm Mormon). It was an honest question - there's no need to be a dick about it.)


Whoa there fella, calm down. Let me clarify, YES there's greater satisfaction for some people in a lead but at what costs? There are plenty of good reasons for sport climbing, namely lack of access for a TR setup and and ZERO gear. If that's the case bolt it but at DL,CT and a select few other places that's not the case. To bolt at these places where a accessible TR exists or the climb has been led before is then just egotistical. If you read further you would see that people who choose to lead at DL do it for a personal challenge.

Austin Baird wrote:
That's why people sport climb? Because it's "safe"? Is it possible that people sport climb because some outstanding routes are impossible to climb on gear? Are people who climb both trad and sport in need of your advice to "sack up"? Is it possible that people sport climb because they enjoy focusing on the movement trying to climb harder and not because they're a bunch of nancy-boys who shake in the face of danger? You take an awfully myopic view of climbing. You also injected some pretty harsh words into an otherwise sincere discussion.


Read what I said again please. YES people sport climb because it's safer and bolting is for climbs that can not go on gear. If you want to lead in CT and at DL then yep, you need to sack up because others before have led these climbs cleanly on gear without drilling holes in a natural resource.

In addition there are routes out there that have probably been deemed "unleadable" only to be led on natural gear later because of advancement of gear options on the market and the gumption of a new generation of climbers. What I'm saying is please don't be so quick to declare something impossible to lead on gear and therefore justifiable to bolt until the climb has been looked at extremely closely.

FLAG
By Tradoholic
Dec 11, 2012
Jon Moen wrote:
A bit of a summary of my two earlier posts: There are good reasons to bolt a TR route, and good reasons to leave it unbolted. This is not specific to a given route or area, but just in general: Good Reasons to Bolt a TR Route (note that these reasons assume that the route cannot be reasonably lead on gear): 1. Setting up TR's impacts the top of the cliff. Bolting routes for leading and lowering-off discourages (or eliminates) clifftop traffic, preventing clifftop erosion, tree damage, etc. 2. Many routes are not very practical to TR. Camhead noted a few examples, including crags where the clifftop is hard to access (Smith, etc) or routes that are way too steep to reasonabbly TR. Really, these two attributes are true of most good sport climbing areas, when it comes down to it. This is basically why sport climbing exists; it lets you climb overhung faces that cannot be Tr'd and cannot be led on gear. 3. Leading is more fun, interesting and exciting than TRing. Unlike what Redtagger said, this is not about ego; it is about enjoyment. Even on a closely bolted rotue with permadraws, the lead evokes a different sensation than the TR. People like sport climbing, and generally would prefer a bolted lead over a TR. 4. Learning and beginner leaders. For easy TR crags, the presence of some bolted routes provides beginners with a chance to learn to lead. Good reasons not to bolt an existing TR route: 1. Rules against bolting. This is the most obvious one. If the land manager says no bolts, then we don't get to bolt. Simple and obvious. That said, if the community thinks that some bolts would be appropiate, and presents a united front to get bolting permits approved, then rules can be changed. Recent provisions allowing for bolting permits int he Flatirons, following a 20-year bolting ban, are an obvoius example. 2. Sketchy access. Even if bolting is not officially against the rules, sometimes it is wise to avoid excess bolting to keep climbing under the radar. An alternative solution here is minimal bolting and well camoflauged bolts. 3. Deference to history. Gritstone comes to mind. The place has a very strong no-bolt ethic, and that is what gives the crags their character. Might as well keep it that way. 4. Finding lots of adventure on little rocks. Following up on the gritstone example, how do you keep you shitty 45-foot tall crag interesting? Make the routes exceptonally bold to lead. The Buttermilks are a simular situation; if the Peabody Boulders had been bolted, they would be short, mediocre sport routes. Unbolted, they are famous highballs. In these cases, leaving route sunbolted makes them better. 5. Routes that could be reasonably lead on gear. Duh; don't bolt trad routes-- the most basic ethic in American climbing. By "reasonably", I am not refering to the absurd Ken Nichols-style leads, involving multiple ropes and skyhooks for pro. "Reasonable" and "safe" are fuzzy definitions, and are decided based on local standards. So to return to the OP, the reason that TR-crags exist is that, on the balance, the "Don't Bolt" reasons outweigh the "Do Bolt" reasons at those local areas.


I pretty much agree with all of this with the exception that I said people only want to bolt and lead for egotistical reasons. To clarify, to bolt something that can be TR'd or has any possibility of being led clean on gear or has been led on gear in the past, THAT would egotistical.

FLAG
By Unassigned User
Dec 11, 2012
I doubt anyone would bolt something in CT that has been led on gear.

1. There aren't that many people in CT that actually bother to bolt climbs.

2. Volcanic Eruption was bolted on rappel with a power drill by a group of locals many years ago (80's?) only to be chopped by you know who. So in that case there was a consensus by a group of locals who all could actually do the route to bolt it. There was actually a physical altercation (one of many)and rides to the police station over it.

3. The problems in CT are mainly due to ONE person. There isn't this group of grisled hard men running around CT enforcing these imaginary strict ethical standards.

4. Many of the poorly protected routes that were led had bolts placed on them free on the lead, even those have been removed taking them from scary to certain death.

5. there are still people in CT that have repeated many if not all of the trad test pieces that also like sport climbing for the simple reason that it is fun. We live here and we will do as we please knowing full well the possible consequences.

FLAG
By MJMobes
From The land of steady habits
Dec 11, 2012
modern man
In Austin defense I know exactly where he is coming from. I learned to climb in SLC so I understand the desire to lead. In SLC if you dont want to lead you have a few options in the state. Go to the gym, go to Parleys Cyn(I-80 baby!), go to Ferguson Cyn(small TR selection), go to Petes rock(suckville) or maybe head down to Provo. After that you are forced to sack up and lead.

I'll say one thing, TR is good for getting strong but leading is the only way to become a better leader, TR makes very few people better leaders, especially onsight leaders. Maybe all onsight leaders are egotistical maniacs, if thats true I am one.

FLAG
By bearbreeder
Dec 11, 2012
TRmasta wrote:
TR is good for getting strong but leading is the only way to become a better leader, TR makes very few people better leaders, especially onsight leaders. Maybe all onsight leaders are egotistical maniacs, if thats true I am one.


TR develops bad habits ... youll do things on TR youll never do on lead ... assisted dynos, flying traverses ;)

that aside ... if you cant lead youll be forever dependent on others to set up the rope for you should there be no access to the top, which many if not most crags do not ... if you take a road trip to yos, are you just going to hang around camp4 waiting for people to set up a TR for ya or be a rope gun???

i often lead many of the pitches on multi, but having a partner who can lead some of them is definitely safer and better IMO ...

personally i dont enjoy climbing with people who arent willing to lead ... i dont care if its and easy climb or a hard one ... but someone who sits around and isnt willing to push themselves is a psyche killer ... someone who leads at their limit whatever that may be i find inspiring ...

FLAG
By JCM
From Seattle, WA
Dec 11, 2012
Red Tagger wrote:
To clarify, to bolt something that can be TR'd or has any possibility of being led clean on gear or has been led on gear in the past, THAT would egotistical.


I still think that you are misusing, or at least overusing this word. It seems that whenever someone does something that they think might benefit the community, such as add bolts, their opponents jump to call them an egotist. I don't think that this makes sense, and it kind of bothers me. Lets consult the dictionary:

e·go·tist (g-tst, g-)
n.
1. A conceited, boastful person.
2. A selfish, self-centered person

Adj. 1. egotistical - characteristic of those having an inflated idea of their own importance
egotistic, narcissistic, self-loving
selfish - concerned chiefly or only with yourself and your advantage to the exclusion of others


By these definitions, one would be an egotist if one were to bolt a popular unbolted route simply because that person--the bolter--wants to enjoy it bolted, for themself, without concern for others. If the needs/wants of others are ignored, and the bolter acts only based onwhat he wants, then that person is an egotist.

In many circumstances, when people put in bolts, it is not simply for their own enjoyment, but is instead meant as a service to the community. A suprisingly common occurance is hearing about 5.14 climbers bolting 5.9 routes, because they think that other people visiting the area will enjoy them. Similarly, someone might spend their own money to install clifftop anchors to preserve trees, so that future climbers can see nice live clifftop trees, and not dead stumps. There is a good word to describe such a person:

al·tru·ism (ltr-zm)
n.
1. Unselfish concern for the welfare of others; selflessness



On the flip side, I would say that it is an example of egotism when one person (cough cough, Ken Nichols) holds entire crags and even states hostage, placing their dogmatic opposition to any bolts over the wants of other climbers and over the needs of preservation of the clifftop environment. Similarly, when one person leads/solos a route once (as the FA), and insists that all other climbers who wish to do the route, forevermore, must do it in the same style, this also reeks of egotism.



So, don't be so quick to make the ego accusation when people place bolts.

FLAG
By gary ohm
From Paso Robles
Dec 11, 2012
Sweet discussion. Fun from the sidelines...

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Stoked...
thefish wrote:
4. Many of the poorly protected routes that were led had bolts placed on them free on the lead, even those have been removed taking them from scary to certain death.


This is the part of the story most folks don't know... that and a lot of "leads" were done on tied down hooks.

FLAG
 
By Michael C
From New Jersey
Dec 12, 2012
Mt Minsi, PA
Austin Baird wrote:
My question isn't about lines that go on gear but instead about the "TR instead of sport" ethic in certain places. If land owners don't allow bolts or if the lines go on gear, I understand why nobody would bolt. But why would climbers rather toprope routes (that can't go on gear and that COULD be bolted and led) than lead them?


I know this area...cliff is about 30 feet high and the rock will not take any gear. There are less than 10 climbs on the face. There are about 4 bolted anchors, and two of the harder climbs have sport bolts. Maybe 3 bolts before the anchor. My opinion, it was pointless. The anchor bolts make sense because the tree-anchoring options suck and you need like 70 feet of static for a 30 foot rock climb. But a 3 bolt climb? To me, it's not even worth it. And it must be the local consenus since all the hangers have been removed (except for the anchor bolts).

Top-roping ain't the end of the world.

FLAG
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 12, 2012
Whiskey-a-Go-Go
TRmasta wrote:
Maybe I generalize too much but wouldnt these states be better off keeping many of these climbers around by challenging their skills on the rock instead of boring them to death with the same old TRs? now flame away!


I agree with most things you said - I suppose I'll have to check out CT. But I will say this last comment isn't quite true. At Devils Lake at least, there are precious few routes above 10d that can be 'safely' led. Routes 11a and up are almost all at least PG13, and often R or R/X rated there, and there simply aren't many people willing to lead 11a R trad with fiddly gear. Those that are willing, do it, and if they leave for 'greener pastures,' it is probably because they finally decided they don't want to die. But they get all the respect they're owed, at least in the local community.

CaptainMo wrote:
This is the part of the story most folks don't know... that and a lot of "leads" were done on tied down hooks.


I've heard stories of RedTagger doing at least one lead with a duct-taped hook (an .11c X). And he fully supports the TR/lead ethic at the Lake.

FLAG
By Tradoholic
Dec 12, 2012
@ Jon Moen

Yea, I see your point but I don't agree, "ego" fits what I am talking about. I also see how this can go both ways, ala Ken Nichols.

My point is that bolting is an intrusive process and should be avoided if possible. There's nothing wrong with TR'ing, it's still climbing, and to add bolts to something that can be easily TR'd just to create a little more "satisfaction" for the climber seems pointless considering the impact on the enviroment and the aesthetics of the natural world.

Overall I think if we all where to go somewhere and evaluate climbs to bolt or not to bolt we would agree 99% of the time. Unfortunately on the internet a higher understanding of a persons meaning when they write is lost. If you were to climb at DL regularly I think the TR/Headpoint ethic would become quite clear and you would become pretty stoked about the community and the climbing because it's a fairly unique experience.

FLAG
By The Stoned Master
Administrator
From Pennsylvania
Dec 12, 2012
Day Lily.
+1 what Red Tagger said:

"My point is that bolting is an intrusive process and should be avoided if possible. There's nothing wrong with TR'ing, it's still climbing, and to add bolts to something that can be easily TR'd just to create a little more "satisfaction" for the climber seems pointless considering the impact on the enviroment and the aesthetics of the natural world."

I believe humans have reached the glutony (glutany? Not sure how to spell it properly but hopefully you deduce what I'm talking about if I've spelled it wrong) stage with bolts already. Climbing is not needed for life; food, shelter and water are so if we can't plug some bolts in our existence/experience does not end. It'll all be alright!

FLAG
By Unassigned User
Dec 12, 2012
We also need to acknowledge that toproping was crucial in ALL of the dangerous leads with hooks done in CT that I witnessed.

Its not like these leads were done ground up first try with hooks.

They were toproped for DAYS sometimes. Then the hooks were placed on lead and the route down climbed to tie them down.

So in some cases toproping was the ONLY way these climbs would ever get lead.

I know many of you on here are very experienced and know this already... this post is for those that don't know how these supposed "ethical" climbers conduct operations.

FLAG
By Eric Engberg
Dec 12, 2012
thefish wrote:
We also need to acknowledge that toproping was crucial in ALL of the dangerous leads with hooks done in CT that I witnessed. Its not like these leads were done ground up first try with hooks. They were toproped for DAYS sometimes. Then the hooks were placed on lead and the route down climbed to tie them down. So in some cases toproping was the ONLY way these climbs would ever get lead. I know many of you on here are very experienced and know this already... this post is for those that don't know how these supposed "ethical" climbers conduct operations.


Multiple ropes and belayers at times too - quite the circus for sure. But when the dust has settled the rock was (mostly) unmarred. Worth it? worthy effort? the answer is not so black and white. A lot of similar tactics are used on the Grit in the UK and it seems more acceptable there.

FLAG
By Unassigned User
Dec 12, 2012
chufftard wrote:
The TR tradiban is turning these areas like CT, the Needles and basically as of GB into museum pieces where no one climbs. Just because you can climb a classic line on a single piece of gear, doesn't mean you should be able to hold it hostage forever. You guys are like the Tea Party of climbing.

there is no TR taliban, its one egotistical extremist holding an entire state hostage in the case of CT.

FLAG
By Unassigned User
Dec 12, 2012
I challenge anyone on here to name a CT climber who has chopped an entire route other than KN.

FLAG
 
By MJMobes
From The land of steady habits
Dec 12, 2012
modern man
thefish wrote:
there is no TR taliban, its one egotistical extremist holding an entire state hostage in the case of CT.


he has plenty of minions dont fool yourself

FLAG
By Unassigned User
Dec 12, 2012
Eric Engberg wrote:
Multiple ropes and belayers at times too - quite the circus for sure. But when the dust has settled the rock was (mostly) unmarred. Worth it? worthy effort? the answer is not so black and white. A lot of similar tactics are used on the Grit in the UK and it seems more acceptable there.

I have no problem with the tactics however it does not give someone the right to dictate what other first ascensionists do with their routes. And it certainly doesn't give someone the right to go chop areas in other states.

As I said before, I and several other climbers will now do as we please knowing full well the consequences. We WILL bolt routes that are our first ascents and other routes that we get permission to do so.

FLAG
By Unassigned User
Dec 12, 2012
TRmasta wrote:
he has plenty of minions dont fool yourself

OK name them.

no offense to you sir but you can't because he doesn't, and especially none that have the balls to go out chopping.

FLAG
By Tom Mulholland
From #1 Cheese Producing State!
Dec 12, 2012
Whiskey-a-Go-Go
thefish wrote:
As I said before, I and several other climbers will now do as we please knowing full well the consequences. We WILL bolt routes that are our first ascents and other routes that we get permission to do so.


Sorry, but just to be clear, are you saying you give no weight to community consensus?

FLAG
By Unassigned User
Dec 12, 2012
Tom Mulholland wrote:
Sorry, but just to be clear, are you saying you give no weight to community consensus?


do you know what the community consensus is in CT?

I've been climbing here for 20 plus years and I'd say that the community would like to have some sport climbs that coexist with trad climbs.

We will bolt our first ascents and other climbs that we are given permission to do so.

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Stoked...
Tom Mulholland wrote:
Sorry, but just to be clear, are you saying you give no weight to community consensus?


I think what he means is there is consensus within the smaller community he climbs in and stated that consensus.

I also have a very tough time buying a lot of the scaring the rock arguments above. There are numerous quarries around CT and I haven't heard of a single protest yet from the climbing community. If you care about a 3/8" hole shouldn't you care about entire cliffs being blow apart elsewhere in the state?

Second, a 3/8" bolt hole can easily be filled with glue and patched to the extent that you'd have to know that it's there to ever find it (when done right) AND you'd have to be a climber on the rope staring at rock 6" from your face. Scaring the rock yes... can it be repaired yes. So in regards to RedTagger it's intrusive to a point but in the end the damage isn't exactly as scaring or intrusive as one would think.

FLAG
By Morgan Patterson
Administrator
Dec 12, 2012
Stoked...
thefish wrote:
I've been climbing here for 20 plus years and I'd say that the community would like to have some sport climbs that coexist with trad climbs. We will bolt our first ascents and other climbs that we are given permission to do so.


Bam x2!

FLAG
By superkick
From West Hartford, CT
Dec 12, 2012
Free Solo up hitchcock gully WI3
top roping is fun...

Id garner to say its how 99% of people on this forum started climbing.

Aka you thought it was fun too..you probably loved it. Its why you moved on into more advanced forms of climbing.

Its cute that now that you climb trad you come back to bash the thing that originally introduced you into climbing.

unless im completely wrong and everyone just started leading trad out of the blue one day...

FLAG
 
By Unassigned User
Dec 12, 2012
CaptainMo wrote:
Bam x2!

See now I have consensus from the community.

FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 3 of 7.  <<First   <Prev   1  2  3  4  5   Next>   Last>>