Is top rope climbing real climbing?

I’m going to start this thread by saying it is ableist to discount top rope/ following from the sport of climbing. Without these options blind climbers would be left behind pretty significantly as well as the wide array of disabled climbers. So let’s hear it does a top rope send count? When does a send become a send? Should we be inclusive of top rope climbers? That is all. 

Who cares? (besides you, Sarah) Just have fun and stay safe.

You will find that all the sport climbers from the redpoint/pinkpoint thread will agree that it’s not about clipping, it’s about climbing…pure athletic difficulty…and they don’t split hairs about such trivialities, so they would agree that top roping is the purest form of the sport.   It doesn’t alter or damage the rock with arbitrary drilling and eliminates the ego-fest of ground up protection.

 Bwahahahaha.

Yes, it’s climbing.

A “send”?

Yes, a toprope send

+1 to the “who cares” view. Just climb, have fun

ZFG what others think. I climb whichever way gives me most joy.

FrankPS wrote:

Who cares? (besides you, Sarah) Just have fun and stay safe.

I don’t care at all I top rope shit and yell send train

Didn’t Lynn Hill once say something to the effect of “Never pass up an opportunity to jump on a top rope”?

Just have fun and be safe! It’s all just a game, anyway.

Of course not! The only thing that counts is naked barefooted chalkless soloing.

only if the TR anchor was drilled on lead, from an ethical stance

No, not a send. It's top roping. You have to lead to send. There is no getting around it. Follow a pitch? Cool, you did not send it.

Think less. Climb more

TR is a hologram

Isaiah aka Zay Foulks wrote:

"It is ableist to discout tope rope/following."

Barf.

Tell that to Erik Weihenmayer he probably climbs hard on top rope

Sarah Z wrote:

Tell that to Erik Weihenmayer he probably climbs hard on top rope

I think using the word, "ableist," earned the one-barf rating.

Now I’m curious on several levels…

1. Is Sarah actually sincere in this post/thread?  I took it as tongue in cheek/ mostly troll.   If not, it makes no sense.   Is there someone officially keeping score and handing out certificates or gear discounts for “real” sends?   Not sure what the real world effect of jargon is. 

2. While I totally agree with the “who cares” sentiment, there is definitely a large contingent of sport climbers who ostensibly do care and Id be interested in hearing from them on what the key principle difference is between a sport pink/red point and a top rope ascent.   Is it the act of stopping and clipping or the  fall distance risk (which could be recreated and even extended on toprope by slack mgt.  what is the principle by which they would say a toprope ascent doesn’t “count” as a send.  Just curious.  

Sarah Z wrote:

I’m going to start this thread by saying it is ableist to discount top rope/ following from the sport of climbing. Without these options blind climbers would be left behind pretty significantly as well as the wide array of disabled climbers. So let’s hear it does a top rope send count? When does a send become a send? Should we be inclusive of top rope climbers? That is all. 

When the top is accessible why lead it at all?? 

Hello Sarah Z, first off I would like to point out that asking for an opinion but then qualifying that question with a statement that anyone who answers in such and such a fashion is prejudiced is not conducive to a healthy discussion.

Moving forward, IMO, no, a top-rope or follow is not a “send.” Traditionally, climbing was either climbing a mountain or training to climb a mountain. Therefore, early climbers practiced (and devised an ethic) like they performed: on a mountain, no gear and no body is above you with a rope. To climb it you must use only those things available to you personally. Therefore, a “send” at the crag was defined as climbing something in the same style that one must climb a big, wild mountain. A top rope above you takes away the danger and commitment that leading a climb in the mountains traditionally has. I think many people will agree that climbing something on top rope is generally easier than lead climbing it, and certainly it makes the climb safer. Therefore, only a lead climb counts as a “send.”

That all being said, the issue is of course not that simple. What about if you are sport climbing and there are pre-placed bolts? Can you use aid gear? Etc, etc, etc. What is “pure” climbing is not a consensus in the climbing community of course—never was and never will be.

Personally, I like the definition of a “send” as many would traditionally think it: no aid gear, no bolts, no rope above you as these are not common when climbing a mountain in nature.

I don't care what the word 'send' means amongst those who love categorization and distinctions. I don't use the word myself. I just enjoy climbing up walls and rocks. If I get to the top, I've achieved my goal. If I don't get to the top, I've achieved my goal. I have two young kids, so I prefer the safest method possible, whatever that may be given the circumstances. 

Sarah Z wrote:

Tell that to Erik Weihenmayer he probably climbs hard on top rope

Several years ago I saw Erik lead Calypso in Eldorado Canyon.. I'm not trying to make a pun but given all the chatter on MP about style, I'll mention that he led it onsight.

For me it’s all about the lead. I love leading routes, that’s why I climb. If I only TR I get bored. As for the “send” I consider a clean TR exactly that, a clean TR or a send on TR. If I want to get a “send” I must lead it clean. I also have some made up rules for myself that I shouldn’t rate a climb (grades or stars) unless I have a climbed it clean on lead. I could care less what other people do or the standard they hold themselves to!