Ground-up ascents

I've never understood what it means to complete a climb 'ground-up'. Can someone clarify this term for me?

I know that the first generation of free climbers would often lower as soon as they fell, then they or someone else would tie in and try the climb with a top-rope to the high point of the previous attempt. Is this considered ground-up? It doesn't seem to be a great style since someone could place a piece midway through the crux and then the next person in line would have the opportunity to claim a free ascent even though he/she didn't have to place (or clip) a piece through the crux.

In modern times, my understanding of the term 'ground-up' is that when you fall, you immediately lower, without hanging around to figure out moves/sequences. You then pull your rope and try again. My question again is: what about the gear you left in place? For a true ground-up ascent, are you forced to find a way around the cliff, abseil in and retrieve your gear before making another attempt? If a 'ground-up' ascent allows you to leave the gear in, then it seems to me like it would be better style in many instances to aim for a 'red-point' instead of a 'ground-up'.

yo dude.
I think in your fist paragraph you are referencing maybe yo-yo style :) you and your partner swapping turns after a fall to complete a route leaving the high point of gear in place and to keep moving upward.

In terms of "ground up" I see it as having to do more with trad and walls then sport climbing. Although a sport climb can be established ground up by drilling all bolts on lead. Doing a wall for me ground up is to not fix any lines. Start climbing and do not retreat. I dont necessarily think that falling voids the ground up ascent. it just would not be a clean ascent or redpoint/onsight. Headpoint. fixing and working and that seems to me more unlike a ground up ascent.

Fair enough, but I hear the term 'ground-up' thrown at difficult one pitch traditional lines a lot. That is the scenario I don't understand? I don't think I've ever heard someone claim a 'ground-up' ascent of a sport climb (sans bolting).

Dusty Ross wrote:Fair enough, but I hear the term 'ground-up' thrown at difficult one pitch traditional lines a lot. What does that mean?

My best guess woudl be that you fall. you lower. You should pull your gear i guess technuically but I am not a core traddy daddy so this may be best anwssered by someone else.

My vote on this would be a ground up ascent would be just like an onsight or redpoint for a sport climb. From the ground. to the top.
The speculations on gear or the piece left to lower on i am unsure of.

and yes. anyone clamiing ground up ascent on a already bolted climb is silly :)

I agree Yo-Yo is less good style than hang-dogging that culminates in a red/pink-point. Just my opinion.

I think in that case Ground-up means you walk up to the route & start climbing. No funny business is used to reach the anchor. Non-ground-up funny business might include anything from subtle tricks like using a long stick clip to get past a difficult or unprotected section, to obvious things like climbing an adjacent route then traversing, or rapping in from the top of the cliff.

Mono wrote---I agree Yo-Yo is less good style than hang-dogging that culminates in a red/pink-point. Just my opinion.

That is strange becuase at least with yo-yo you are coming back down and climbing clean to your high point. Hang dogg'n just lets you rest at the hardest point at the moment and inhibits you from actually climbing clean into what could maybe be the crux.

But i also see yo yo more of a tool for first free ascents or FA's rather then working an established route clean.

I think this term is (or should be) used only to describe the style of the First Ascent. Ground-Up means you start from the ground, and climb up. This means no pre-inspection of the line on rappel. It also means no bolts placed on rappel. You can have a ground-up ascent with or without hangdogging. The guidebook to NC, for instance, will occasionally include "with some dogging" in the description of a ground-up ascent if they used that tactic. Some still consider the no-dogging style to be better. Yo-yo style is often accepted in the no-dogging approach, I suppose it's sort of a compromise to facilitate getting the route completed.

SAL wrote:Mono wrote---I agree Yo-Yo is less good style than hang-dogging that culminates in a red/pink-point. Just my opinion. That is strange becuase at least with yo-yo you are coming back down and climbing clean to your high point. Hang dogg'n just lets you rest at the hardest point at the moment and inhibits you from actually climbing clean into what could maybe be the crux. But i also see yo yo more of a tool for first free ascents or FA's rather then working an established route clean.

With a redpoint you're also 'climbing clean to your high point", but also placing the gear and/or clipping the rope in the act of leading up to that high point.

I think you might have thought I meant a hangdog ascent is better than a Yo-Yo ascent. That is not what I meant. I meant a redpoint ascent that was facilitated by hangdogging is better than a Yo-Yo. I don;t expect everyone to agree with that--its pretty much the crux of the argument between top-down sport climbing vs ground-up trad climbing.

Ground up? Like when you climb a Veedavoo hand crack?
Just kidding.
Ground up ascents can be free or aid, done in good style or bad.
It merely means that there is no way to pre-place pro and one has to start from the ground. Going around to the top of the route to set a toprope or rap line is out of the question.
Trad routes are done ground up almost always.
A ground up sport route means that you can't toprope or rap down to place gear. Often one has to resort to hanging on hooks and other contrivances to drill bolts, or to stand precariously and drill while run out above the last piece of gear.

It's funny, even though these are pretty fundamental terms, there is still a lot of disagreement on what they mean, even among top climbers (which makes it fun when you read about the latest "rad" ascent).

Case in point, I've heard ascents described as "onsight" in Alpinist because the climbers freed the route in the first day they tried it, though with falls.

To me, ground up means start at the bottom, go up. This does not preclude the use of fixed lines as long as you're only using them to access a point you previously climbed to. If you did climb ground up, and didn't use fixed lines, that would be a better style, let's call it: ground up, no fixed lines. If you climb ground up without coming down and finish the route all in one go, that would be "ground up, in a push."

I believe Bachar's argument against hangdogging in the "yo-yo vs redpoint debate" was that hanging on the rope should only be a safety measure, not an "aid" to freeing the route. I always felt this argument broke down when it came to hanging on hooks to place bolts, but it does maintain the "ground up" nature of the ascent, though fairly contrived in my opinion, and missing the point. The virtue of ground up bolting while hanging from hooks seems to lie in the fact that it is scary, and must therefore, be better style. Don't think about it more deeply than this, though, or you'll get a headache.

Full disclosure: I have done all of the things described above, and I, therefore, am despicable in the eyes of all climbers, for one reason or another.

Dusty Ross wrote: I don't think I've ever heard someone claim a 'ground-up' ascent of a sport climb (sans bolting).

Go to the Potrero, most all the big multi-pitch climbs were done from the ground up. All bolts. Ya just gotta have a gas powered Ryobi and a TON of bolts. And water.

It seems like the community is as confused about the term as I am. :)

Hey Dusty,

Sounds like Mike A. has it right.

"Ground up" refers to new routes that are done without pre-inspection or preparation and are put up on the lead. Contrast that with rapping in to inspect holds and/or gear placements, place bolts or gear, clean loose rock, brush holds, and even test out moves.

Ground up can still include putting bolts in on the lead, whether drilling from stances or hanging on hooks. "Ground up" gets tossed around as a term a bit because those first leads tend to be more serious because the climber doesn't know about the grade or the protection. In my experience, "ground up" is a lot harder because you when you climb up you don't know of that corner you're aiming for will have a protectable crack or a protectionless seam and sometimes what appears to be 5.easy can turn into 5.hard and scary.

Remember climbing that new route you did with Joy and I 4-5 years ago? We did the 3rd pitch to that route. The 3rd pitch wasn't too bad but the 2nd pitch turned out to be much harder and scarier than I anticipated. I did it ground up but had I rapped in previously, I could have added some bolts, cleaned some placements, and gained some knowledge about what to expect. Instead, my ground up effort was 5.9/5.10 R/X.

hard odubb ascents leave you pretty ground-up sometimes if you arent wearing long sleeves or knee pads..

Bump, for divnamite.....

Michael Schneiter wrote:Remember climbing that new route you did with Joy and I 4-5 years ago? We did the 3rd pitch to that route. The 3rd pitch wasn't too bad but the 2nd pitch turned out to be much harder and scarier than I anticipated. I did it ground up but had I rapped in previously, I could have added some bolts, cleaned some placements, and gained some knowledge about what to expect. Instead, my ground up effort was 5.9/5.10 R/X.

I remember climbing on that route. The second pitch sounds exciting, did you go back and put bolts in it, or leave it as is?

Are you saying that 'ground up' only applies to first ascents? My interest in this question initially arose because of the following two references in particular:

"Watch Cameron Tague go ground up and take repeated whippers off it in the Scary Faces video- you will see absolutely no fear in his eyes."
-Route description for Evictor

"Alex wants to try the first 'ground up' ascent of Musta been High."
-A climber I met at Rincon.

Both of these references referred to routes which had previously been done, and I wasn't sure what the 'ground up' reference meant. I feel like the consensus on mp.com is that they both misused the word.

Thanks, Hank!

I've always wonder about ground up ascents as well. Let's say you are working on a new route. If you fall, a better style is to lower, and redo the climb from the bottom again. What if your route is long, say you have a 60M rope and you fall at 40M? Do people always make sure the anchor is half the rope length or less?

Dusty Ross wrote: I remember climbing on that route. The second pitch sounds exciting, did you go back and put bolts in it, or leave it as is?

I put one bolt in on that pitch but that was it. It's still fairly serious even with the bolt. Maybe someday I'll add some more.

Dusty Ross wrote:Are you saying that 'ground up' only applies to first ascents?

I may be misusing the term myself because I see the term 'ground up' used a lot in reference to efforts such as those. I suppose it can be used for both but perhaps it's good to designate or note the difference between ground up first ascent and ground up repeat. Some friends made a noble free climbing effort on El Nino last summer in which they left the ground with food, water, and gear for 7 days. I believe they used the term ground up for their effort. I feel I hear 'ground up' used the most for first ascent efforts. Either way, first ascent or repeat, 'ground up' tends to be more difficult.

Dusty, when are you going to come over to the Western Slope and play? We can do some of our own ground up adventures.

Dusty Ross wrote:"Watch Cameron Tague go ground up and take repeated whippers off it in the Scary Faces video- you will see absolutely no fear in his eyes." -Route description for Evictor

Dusty Ross wrote: "Alex wants to try the first 'ground up' ascent of Musta been High." -A climber I met at Rincon.

Ground-up can be and is used for repeat ascents. It is confusing because on a modern ground-up attempt a climber can fall, keep gear clipped for subsequent attempts and hangdog. It seems all that matters is that the climber only makes upward progress while on lead.

In the two cases above ground-up means that the climber is not going to top rope the route as preparation for leading it. Otherwise the ascent would be considered a headpoint, a clean lead with TR rehearsal.

On scary, dangerous or runout routes it is more "difficult" to get a ground-up ascent so that style is "better" and thus more desirable.