Bouldering VS. Roped Climbing

I wish roped climbing were as social as bouldering. With bouldering you just show up with your pads and people show up with theirs and you all do the boulder in turns with some conversation or beta discussion/advice about other boulders to try in the area and maybe continue on with them to their/your next boulder etc. This is why I prefer bouldering when I am going outside solo. I do also enjoy the opposite of that where it is just me nature, the rock, and maybe a pad. I think I am starting to prefer just bouldering because of the freedom but I love the longer sport climbs still and they are worth the extra effort/gear to do.  

With sport two people usually take up the route for a little while and you just go somewhere else real quick or chat a bit but you don't really want to be distracting a belay... This is also why it is good for group trips everyone gets some down time to hang out but everyone also gets to climb as much as they want.

'After the gym, the reward is this activity called bouldering. For the climbers it's relaxation, it also helps polish techniques, it helps to increase finger strength..... it's sort of like a golfer going to a driving range.' 

https://youtu.be/wYJ7VBCQ3HQ?t=713

Ropes are aid. Sport climbers are scared of falling to the ground. If ur climbing a 5.12b the crux will be like a v4 move, SOFT!!! Bouldering has hard moves rope climbs are just one long jug haul. Lead climbers think their cool for taking 5 foot falls try taking a 20 footer to the ground. Lol the rant is almost over. Rope climbers shud just stop bragging about takin whippers and stuff cause ur not cool. Every lead climber who’s braggin about being cool should voluntarily take a 20 foot fall to the ground. 

Wyatt N wrote:

Ropes are aid. Sport climbers are scared of falling to the ground. If ur climbing a 5.12b the crux will be like a v4 move, SOFT!!! Bouldering has hard moves rope climbs are just one long jug haul. Lead climbers think their cool for taking 5 foot falls try taking a 20 footer to the ground. Lol the rant is almost over. Rope climbers shud just stop bragging about takin whippers and stuff cause ur not cool. Every lead climber who’s braggin about being cool should voluntarily take a 20 foot fall to the ground. 

I don't brag about whippers, do takes if I think I'm going to fall, and I've decked after 30-foot fall...
1) Crash Pads are aid.
2) Boulderers are afraid of falling or they wouldn't carry the pad.

A nonboulderer to a boulderer, try harder with your argument.  Its a MP forum!!!!!

My favorite kind of climbing was what Chouinard suggested I call "3rd class". Challenging difficulties close to the ground, then as one goes higher, lesser difficulties. All exploratory without ropes. (You can hear me speak of this briefly with Honnold in "The Invisible Cord" on a Climbing Gold podcast.) 

I was never a very good traditional roped climber. But I was not averse to top roping at times. In case you don't know, I was considered peculiar.  

Contrary to many in this post...

I enjoy bouldering for the solitude.  While climbing with others can be great, I like the serenity and quiet of being out bouldering in the forest with no one around...magical!

That and not having to deal with gear.  There is nothing about owning/packing/transporting gear that I enjoy.

Ranking disciplines (my enjoyment): 1.Bouldering - 2.Trad - 3.Ice - 4.Alpine - 5.Sport

*The forum narratives regarding membership in each style doesn't seem accurate to me, but perhaps it's just internet fun.

** I will say that I have seen multiple hard boulderers (afraid of heights) go from no trad experience to climb 5.11 and harder trad within a season with a little mentoring. I think it would be much more difficult to take the 5.12 trad climber and make them a V10 boulderer.

Gumby King wrote:

I don't brag about whippers, do takes if I think I'm going to fall, and I've decked after 30-foot fall...
1) Crash Pads are aid.
2) Boulderers are afraid of falling or they wouldn't carry the pad.

A nonboulderer to a boulderer, try harder with your argument.  Its a MP forum!!!!!

“I don’t brag about whippers” (3 seconds later) “I’ve decked after a 30-foot fall”

Wyatt N wrote:

“I don’t brag about whippers” (3 seconds later) “I’ve decked after a 30-foot fall”

That was not a whipper but a splat.

Gumby King wrote:

That was not a whipper but a splat.

At least I didn’t have a rope I thought would protect me.

It never ceases to amaze me* how many twits drop into the bouldering forum to say, "huh huh, bouldering sucks, try REAL climbing!"

I could maaaybe understand this back when recent topics were posted from the front page, so someone could click on a bouldering topic there without knowing it's from this forum before spouting "bouldering is just for practice, but I build my impressive Honnold-like headgame by nature hiking up choss gullies," but given that you now have to navigate through the forum slums several steps to get to this, and I can only assume that folks who come to this forum just to click reply and say "HEY EVERYONE I DO NOT BOULDER AND ADVERTISING THIS FACT VALIDATES MY OWN INSECURITIES ABOUT MY LIMITED SKILLS EVEN ON ROPE SO MIGHT I ADD ONCE MORE THAT NOT ONLY DO I NOT BOULDER BUT I THINK IT'S DUMB THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME" are just attention-seeking scrots.

*just kidding, I ceased being amazed years ago

I’ve always wondered if the “disparage every other kind of climbing” attitude is confined to American trad climbers of a certain grade or if it’s found in Europe and Asia too. Or South America 

I've always enjoyed climbing for its ability to take you to incredible places and interact with amazing features. That usually means roping up. Also hiking with pads is way worse than hiking with a rope + rack.

John Gill wrote:

My favorite kind of climbing was what Chouinard suggested I call "3rd class". Challenging difficulties close to the ground, then as one goes higher, lesser difficulties. All exploratory without ropes. (You can hear me speak of this briefly with Honnold in "The Invisible Cord" on a Climbing Gold podcast.) 

Your take on the perfection of dynamic movement being an integral part of bouldering was really interesting when looking at what bouldering has become today - is it right that you didn't consider the Thimble a true boulder?

Big Red wrote:

I've always enjoyed climbing for its ability to take you to incredible places and interact with amazing features. That usually means roping up. Also hiking with pads is way worse than hiking with a rope + rack.

Your take on the perfection of dynamic movement being an integral part of bouldering was really interesting when looking at what bouldering has become today - is it right that you didn't consider the Thimble a true boulder?

At the time I was intrigued with what these days might be called free solo exploration, perhaps an ultimate form of the sport. I learned later Paul Preuss and Georg Winkler had done this sort of thing many years before, both perishing from the practice. By the time I had started playing around on the Thimble I had wandered up  various unexplored things in the Tetons, including the south wall of Storm Point twice, and played on Blacktail Butte, as well as soloed some of the Needle spires in the Black Hills. My first real mountain climb was picking and exploring my way up the east face of Longs Peak in 1954.  I began to see the Thimble as a challenge in this regard - to what lengths would I push myself? The bouldering around the base after a day's climbing turned into a more serious affair. And, yes, I found my limits as a free solo explorer on that project. I never thought of it as a boulder problem. Ironic it would trigger enthusiasm for bouldering isn't it?

Bouldering I saw as a form of gymnastics where danger could be minimized. An athletic event that might in the long run be formalized competition. And that's where it has come, as well as being a popular form of climbing. But in addition, in its extended format, as Alex mentions, highballing is a very serious undertaking. I get nervous watching videos of Too Big To Flail or Eviloution!

Actually, highball bouldering may go back to the beginnings of rock climbing as a sport in the late 1800s. On my website are a few photos from that era of boulderers on pretty large rocks. So its the level of difficulty that has elevated. The Thimble is about V5, so when I see highballers on V11s I am very, very impressed.  

Mark E Dixon wrote:

I’ve always wondered if the “disparage every other kind of climbing” attitude is confined to American trad climbers of a certain grade or if it’s found in Europe and Asia too. Or South America 

It's certainly not unknown of here but you Yanks seem to do it with a certain panache for tribalism that no-one else on the planet seems to master to the same degree. 

John Gill wrote:

At the time I was intrigued with what these days might be called free solo exploration, perhaps an ultimate form of the sport. I learned later Paul Preuss and Georg Winkler had done this sort of thing many years before, both perishing from the practice. By the time I had started playing around on the Thimble I had wandered up  various unexplored things in the Tetons, including the south wall of Storm Point twice, and played on Blacktail Butte, as well as soloed some of the Needle spires in the Black Hills. My first real mountain climb was picking and exploring my way up the east face of Longs Peak in 1954.  I began to see the Thimble as a challenge in this regard - to what lengths would I push myself? The bouldering around the base after a day's climbing turned into a more serious affair. And, yes, I found my limits as a free solo explorer on that project. I never thought of it as a boulder problem. Ironic it would trigger enthusiasm for bouldering isn't it?

Bouldering I saw as a form of gymnastics where danger could be minimized. An athletic event that might in the long run be formalized competition. And that's where it has come, as well as being a popular form of climbing. But in addition, in its extended format, as Alex mentions, highballing is a very serious undertaking. I get nervous watching videos of Too Big To Flail or Eviloution!

Actually, highball bouldering may go back to the beginnings of rock climbing as a sport in the late 1800s. On my website are a few photos from that era of boulderers on pretty large rocks. So its the level of difficulty that has elevated. The Thimble is about V5, so when I see highballers on V11s I am very, very impressed.  

Professor Gill, you are the best! We exchanged emails years ago, your thoughtful response and perspective on the sport has prominent place on my bookcase. Many thanks- Chris

The problem with "real climbing" is half your climbing day is belaying. Who loves belaying?

AStezer wrote:

The problem with "real climbing" is half your climbing day is belaying. Who loves belaying?

Hauling around a bunch of pads and having a bunch of asses in your face half the time is very similar.

Real climbers move together. 

I enjoy both.  They are two different disciplines but both are fun.  I find that bouldering helps with roped climbing and vice versa.  

Both? I boulder v7 ish and trad lead 5.10d, sport climb 5.11++. Just depends on whats feeling strong. I prefer trad just because you can have the pleasure of long runouts but usually the freedom to end them whenever you want (/can; route and gear dependent) rather than relying on the gent who spaced the bolts for extra fun for your safety/ fun balance or bouldering where being high is pretty much only from the jar of leaves you stole from your uncles glovebox. 

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned cost. Maybe I'm the only person living out of a school bus and climbing wherever they can, but I can't be the only one that can't afford all of the gear required for roped climbing. Another poster mentioned free solo exploration, and I think that's more where I lie. I enjoy taking 3-4 hour hikes through rough terrain, climbing small cliffs and traversing boulders as is necessary. I'm not one to sit around a single Boulder and climb it multiple times. I climb to go places, and I just can't afford rope lol.