Message from discussion 5.12 babble

Path: gmdzi!unido!mcsun!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!ico!rays
From: r...@ico.isc.com (Ray Snead)
Newsgroups: rec.backcountry
Subject: Re: 5.12 babble
Summary: ethics, jargon
Message-ID: <1990Feb22.170455.14998@ico.isc.com>
Date: 22 Feb 90 17:04:55 GMT
References: <17230058@hpcndm.CND.HP.COM>
Reply-To: r...@ico.ISC.COM (Ray Snead)
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Boulder CO
Lines: 48
Posted: Thu Feb 22 18:04:55 1990


Interesting thread, this. Particularly since 5.12 is hardly at the cutting
edge of difficulty these days... More interesting still is that many "top" 
climbers cannot consistantly flash at this level.

[ Time out here for some jargon-- some of the posted explanations of terms
  like "a vue", flash, redpoint and pinkpoint have been a bit muddled. These
  are listed above in order of desirability, with "a vue" ("on sight") the
  most sought after. A flash has come to mean the ascent of a route with
  no weighting of the rope (falls, hangs, etc.) It also generally connotes
  no significant pre-inspection, beta, etc. An "a vue" ascent is a flash
  with *absolutely* no beta or inspection; it is simply the purest form of
  flash. Redpointing means an ascent without weighting the rope. A redpoint
  implies that attempts involving weighting the rope were required for the
  ultimate success. Pinkpoint is a now-unfashonable term which means that
  a redpoint was achieved with fixed gear in place; that the climber did
  not place all the gear on the ascent. With easy-clip bolt routes, this 
  is less of a distinction than it once was. ]

Anyway, there are a lot of very good climbers in Boulder. Many of them have
flashed 5.12 (or even 5.13), but almost no one can do it consistently. Even
at the top level, a 5.12 will take "a few trys" for most. Even with a current
top-end of 5.14b or c, most excellent climbers can't consistently flash 5.12.

Another aspect of this thread is the developing "debate" between Ken Cline
and Bruce Hildenbrand. It is about ethics, and the argument is rooted in the 
fact that there are really two aspects of rockclimbing. There is traditional 
climbing, a la '70s California ground-up ethics. And there is sport climbing, 
as practiced at Buoux and Smith Rocks. They are different animals, and most 
explosive arguments about ethics occur when the two branches of the sport 
are considered as one. Sport climbers tend to focus on maximum difficulty, 
and trads value mind control over danger.

Most of our modern ethical problems stem from this dichotomy. It is the root
of the bolt controversy. It is the source of disagreements of the sort that
Ken and Bruce will no doubt debate-- what constitutes a lead?

Me, I straddle the fence. I don't feel much like a sport climber when I'm 30 
ft. out doing 5.10 moves on low-angle granite in the South Platte. On the other
hand, it doesn't ruin my day if I fall once or twice leading a 50 ft. 5.11 bolt
route in the Flatirons. 

Which provides the biggest rush? I don't know-- that is part of what makes
climbing in the '90s so interesting!


	Ray Snead
	Boulder, Colorado