Grading gym routes=not via YDS

Ya know what grinds my gears (in the voice of Peter Griffin), not using the YDS in gyms. I recently went to a gym that used route tags that were color coded to represent YDS grade ranges. Now, I am not color blind (but some are!) but it was hard to see the difference between the red routes and the salmon routes(and if I were if a beginner climber I might not know what I was looking at) Yes, I just looked up and could tell the difference between the 5.9 and the 5.11 grades, but it still was stupid.  I climbed the route, then wondered what it was graded (as I was traveling and don’t know the local hard vs. soft scale) as a curiosity and then to scale what I wanted to climb the rest of the evening.
 

Why can’t gyms just use YDS, as we all know what that means, and if you want a range, just call it -,whole number,  and +.  

What set me off is I just saw a scale using 1 to 5 “dots”for difficulty at a different gym.  Why can’t we all join hands and use the same system (and all change to metric while we are at it ;) ) 

(Sorry, board sitting at an airport)  

Some gyms think that climbers not knowing the grades will be more interesting or fun. Try what looks fun instead of what looks hard/ soft.

Wyatt N wrote:

Some gyms think that climbers not knowing the grades will be more interesting or fun. Try what looks fun instead of what looks hard/ soft.

I love it and hate it. My OCD training log/spreadsheet side hates it, my chicken shit self that used to not get on hard grades loves the ambiguity.

It's a cop-out. They got sick of hearing all the complaints from the newbs "That pink one in the corner is NOT 5.10!". I hate it too but I can't blame 'em.

Tradiban wrote:

It's a cop-out. 

Lame 

I've never experienced this type of system for route gyms, but I rarely climb on routes in the gym.

For boulders I think it's great. It still gives you all the info you need to select problems of the correct difficulty, but circumvents the annoying grade debates about whether the gym is soft or stiff. It also (for me at least) makes it easier to check any grade expectations at the door. I also don't find these local systems to be any harder to use - even if you are new to the gym you can figure out the system in about 10 minutes, so that no big deal.

JCM wrote:

I wouldn’t care but I feel like sbp makes way less sustained routes than they used to because of it. I get routes don’t necessarily need to be sustained but a single hard crux move isn’t always great training.

The upside is that if you can crack climb at sbp, every once in awhile you can get up the hardest routes in the gym with a 5.10 jam.

Princess Puppy Lovr wrote:

I wouldn’t care but I feel like sbp makes way less sustained routes than they used to because of it. I get routes don’t necessarily need to be sustained but a single hard crux move isn’t always great training.

The upside is that if you can crack climb at sbp, every once in awhile you can get up the hardest routes in the gym with a 5.10 jam.

I used to dislike the monochrome circuit setup at SBP, thinking that was the cause of SBPs issues (as you allude to here). But the gym here is Sacramento also has a monochrome circuit system, but does it really well and is a good training gym. So I think the SBP issues are just SBP issues.

I've got a whole thread I've been thinking about starting regarding how irritating the Bouldering Project gyms are...

I really liked Austin Bouldering Project when I lived there, myself. They seemed to use tons of volumes and set routes with lots of full body movement, many other gyms I frequent just put holds on a plane or two. The overlap in the monochrome scale did give you nice surprises every so often too. And, the space between problems made it easy to work things without getting in the way of other climbers.

I can see not liking the Project gyms if you are after "training for climbing", though, they're more like "fun exercise with your friends that kinda helps you outside".

Nathan Sullivan wrote:

I can see not liking the Project gyms if you are after "training for climbing", though, they're more like "fun exercise with your friends that kinda helps you outside".

Which is fine but because of zoning issues, Seattle has probably fewer gyms per capita than any other major city. SBP is the closest to my house and it is still 20 min away. I agree the movement is generally better but the sacrifice total route volume. In a session I can often send at least half the routes in the gym at my ability level so all the space and aesthetics doesn't help me.

Princess Puppy Lovr wrote:

 In a session I can often send at least half the routes in the gym at my ability level so all the space and aesthetics doesn't help me.

Not to turn this into a bouldering project thread, but now I'm curious. At MBP a single color circuit has to be almost 30 separate problems, and this wouldn't include the "overlap" in grades from different colors. That seems like a large amount of volume. You're always working at your flash level or just slightly above?

I like MBP just because the setting there seems much better and the problems rotate much much faster than other local gyms. Plus the fitness section. Even if does feel a little clean/corporate. 

Tradiban wrote:

It's a cop-out. They got sick of hearing all the complaints from the newbs "That pink one in the corner is NOT 5.10!". I hate it too but I can't blame 'em.

This has been my experience as well.  Not naming names, but my prior gym didn't go this route until people started bitching about the grading being inaccurate.  

I kinda feel for the setters though- most of the complaints come from people that don't climb outside, or don't have much experience climbing and haven't been at it for years and years (perhaps this is just an idiosyncrasy of my region).  So, in other words, most of the complaints come from people that don't know enough to know that they shouldn't be complaining.  I used to be one of those people.  The longer I climb, the less I care about grades and if the problem is synthetic, as all gym problems/routes are, and makes absolutely zero sense, I bring it up to the head setter at my current gym, and just ask what the intended beta is.  Most of the time it's related to hip flexibility if I can't do it, or the beta is too scrunched for my tall frame.  The ones that I'm just not strong enough to climb are sadly obvious.  

Not every person can climb every problem.  Something reachy with small holds that goes at V3 will feel like V5 to some people.  NBD.  I'm more focused on good setting than accurate grading.  Grades are so subjective, especially when you start throwing in setters with different strengths/heights, etc.  These aren't World Cup setters, a lot of the time in gyms that reside in areas that don't have a huge pool of talented climbers from which to recruit to set, you'll see relatively young and strong climbers that haven't been climbing that long as setters.  This is fine as long as there is experienced and competent leadership that can develop the youngsters into skilled setters.  In a lot of gyms, they're currently going through the problems that other industries are facing- they can't find enough knowledgeable and skilled people to work a position properly for the amount of pay that they're able to offer for the position.

All that being said, grade ranges are still copouts.  If you're a climber, gumby or not, muster the gumption to approach route setters and ask them questions instead of just telling them some version of "this sucks". You'll likely find that they're eager to talk to you and/or educate you in the process about their methods and their overall approach to setting.  If you're a setter or a head setter and you take the easy road (by offering a range of V-grades usually established by a color system like we're all in kindergarten again) out instead of encouraging feedback and communication amongst the patrons and membership, then you suck, and your gym doesn't give a shit about climbing, just appeasing bitchy members so they can keep that $$ rolling in.  Eventually they'll be swallowed up by bigger gyms with a focus on good setting and communication between setting staff and general patrons/membership.  If this wasn't the case, everyone would still be using AOL or Yahoo for their email, but better products win in the end.

Double J wrote:

(Sorry, board sitting at an airport)  

Also, why are you sitting on a board in an airport?   

Double J wrote:

Ya know what grinds my gears (in the voice of Peter Griffin), not using the YDS in gyms. I recently went to a gym that used route tags that were color coded to represent YDS grade ranges. Now, I am not color blind (but some are!) but it was hard to see the difference between the red routes and the salmon routes(and if I were if a beginner climber I might not know what I was looking at) Yes, I just looked up and could tell the difference between the 5.9 and the 5.11 grades, but it still was stupid.  I climbed the route, then wondered what it was graded (as I was traveling and don’t know the local hard vs. soft scale) as a curiosity and then to scale what I wanted to climb the rest of the evening.
 

Why can’t gyms just use YDS, as we all know what that means, and if you want a range, just call it -,whole number,  and +.  

What set me off is I just saw a scale using 1 to 5 “dots”for difficulty at a different gym.  Why can’t we all join hands and use the same system (and all change to metric while we are at it ;) ) 

(Sorry, board sitting at an airport)  

conversely, I hate gyms that abuse YDS by grading so soft that it's irrelevant to outdoor climbing (what's up, planet granite portland) - I'd rather they just use a made-up system

tobias bundle wrote:

Not to turn this into a bouldering project thread, but now I'm curious. At MBP a single color circuit has to be almost 30 separate problems, and this wouldn't include the "overlap" in grades from different colors. That seems like a large amount of volume. You're always working at your flash level or just slightly above?

I like MBP just because the setting there seems much better and the problems rotate much much faster than other local gyms. Plus the fitness section. Even if does feel a little clean/corporate. 

Yeah if I were to actually classify the colors, blue=v4-v5, pink=v6 and white is just hard. I can generally do 15 blues in a session or every blue at their freemont location. I need to spend like 45 min on a pink and whites only go for me if there is a jam. They actually reset too often and I go so infrequently working a pink is often a waste of time. Also there are so many people in my way all the time. The volume of walls is just under utilized in my opinion. 

Mm like and hate the color spectrum grading; makes for interesting bickering at the gym, maybe allows more flexibility in setting?, harder to know if you are training the right circuits for your outdoor projects. Overall 50/50 on it, would be a bit more bitter if all gyms adopted a color wheel and threw out YDS or if the only gym near me was color wheel. 

On a similar note, anyone ever notice when a corporate gym is looking to attract new members (grand openings. slow in the summer, etc.) the grades seem a lil softer especially on the easier stuff? 

Shawn S wrote:

On a similar note, anyone ever notice when a corporate gym is looking to attract new members (grand openings. slow in the summer, etc.) the grades seem a lil softer especially on the easier grades? 

We call it New Years grading because everyone makes New Years resolutions to get fit or lose weight so they go to the climbing gym where the setters set really soft and then they buy gym memberships. 

I prefer gyms using only approximate grading via broad color or numbering schemes. Most gyms I've been to in Europe never used outdoor grades, not even as a corresponding range. Typically its just colored or numbered tags on start holds ranging from easy to very hard. Gym grades don't really represent outdoor grades anyway. Having the same grading scale only causes people to be overconfident about their ability.

I tried to convince my local bouldering gym to eliminate grades entirely.

I mean, how much commitment is there to a 12 foot boulder?

Just try whatever looks good and if it's too hard, fall off. If too easy, try something else.

But they were certain the membership wouldn't tolerate the absence of grades.

I’m confused (shocker). So the gym has created a brand new way to grade routes or they use a system that incorporates a range of YDS grades?

I understand the frustration for not listing an explicit grade (or grade range in the form of +’s and -‘s) for training purposes. To me, it seems that you also have to understand that big, commercial gyms don’t necessarily care about giving specific/accurate grades. Many gyms main focus is getting more people on routes in hopes they become members. People are more likely to come back if they get a little ego boost. So if a route is really 5.10 but is in their gym’s “5.10-5.11” rating system, that allows the climber to pretend they may have climbed a 5.11d instead of a 5.10a. By creating an ambiguous grading system this also allows people who may have been otherwise “afraid of trying” a certain grade to feel more adventurous as there is less perceived pressure.

TLDR; grades don’t matter in practice climbing. 

Not Not MP Admin wrote:

TLDR; grades don’t matter in practice climbing. 

Counterpoint to this: Practice training is the only time grades matter. 

If I am training, I want to know whether the climb for me is going to be flash, try hard, or a project. I don't want to do a lot of wasted mileage or spend time searching for a climb for the type of training. I don't care about how a gym rates so long as they are rated consistently. I don't care that the 5.12 would be 11- outdoors so long as within the gym the 12 is consistently harder than the 11+.  When people say "don't worry about grades, try what looks fun" that doesn't make sense in a gym because I'm generally not trying to have "fun" at the gym. Outdoors am I trying to have fun, and no one in the world cares that I onsighted 5.11, so therefore: outdoors grades don't matter. (I feel like I just made a Puppy Lovr argument and for that I am sorry.)