Joshua Tree, Figures on a Landscape, Broken Ankles TR (short)
Duncan Thomson
tearing through the park on Saturday. I see today from the net that
someone fell and broke an ankle. There's kind of a weird connection
here. On Sunday, I went to do Figures on a Landscape on North Astrodome
with my buddy Youssef. I've always wanted to do it, but never had the
chance - plus I wasn't sure I was ready for it - 10b is pretty hard for
me. But I was feeling good, the weather was perfect, and I knew I
wouldn't get another chance to be in Joshua Tree for a while, so I
decided to take advantage of the opportunity. I'm just about to get on
the route when Youssef tells me, "I really hate to tell you this, but
last time I did this route my partner fell and broke his ankle". I
guess he fell just as he was getting to the second belay station at the
end of the first pitch. (For some reason there are two belay stances,
each with three bolts, at the end of the first pitch. The second one is
about 15 feet right, and slightly above, the first one. I think the
crux of the climb is the traverse from one station to the other. Not
sure why there are two stations - perhaps to allow the crux to be led
without rope drag.) His friends had to carry him all the way back to
the road, then they drove him to the hospital. Must have been a bitch
getting him back to the road - for those of you who haven't been to the
Astrodomes it's about a 30 minute walk from the parking lot, some of it
over fairly rough ground. Anyway, I led off on the first pitch. Got to
the first belay station OK - though I found the climbing pretty stiff
and the bolts far enough apart to keep things, shall we say,
"interesting". Then I tried to traverse over to the second belay
station. I think the moves weren't too bad, but the psychological
aspects of the climb were getting to my head. I got a ways out, started
getting sketchy, and decided to retreat. I knew I wouldn't make it back
to the bolts, but figured I'd cut down the length of the fall. Managed
to make a couple moves back towards safety, then came off and logged
about 10 or 15 feet of air time. Very cool fall though - didn't hit or
scrape anything, and nice soft landing. I hauled myself back up to the
bolts, brought Youssef up to the belay and offered him the opportunity
to lead. He graciously declined, not wanting to deny me the pleasure of
successfully completing the lead. Thanks Youssef! So I puckered up my
sphincter and headed out again. Just a few traversing moves on thin
edges, then you are able to grab a decent ledge below the next set of
bolts. It's not over yet though, you still have to make a kind of
tricky mantle move and stand up on the jug before you can clip. Phew!
What a classic climb - it's really a masterpiece. I highly recommend
it. If you're solid at 10b it should be just plain enjoyable. If, like
me, 10b is about your limit leading face climbs, you may find it
"invigorating". :-)
Duncan
Krich
> ... (For some reason there are two belay stances,
> each with three bolts, at the end of the first pitch. [I'm] not
> sure why there are two stations ...)
I believe the second station was added after it became apparantthat the
first station was placed in a large detached flake of rock.
:- k
MadBolter
Well, that, and the fact that if you stop at the first belay and the next
leader falls on the 10b crux (now the first moves of Pitch 2)
you've set him up for a Factor 2 (or damn close to it) fall on said
detached flake belay....Wheeeeeee!!!
Furthermore, the second station is far more comfortable than hanging
in your harness.
-Rex "I remember when there was only one bolt at the 'second belay'
so you HAD to stop at the death flake" Pieper
Pat Nay
There was no second belay for years, I always did wonder about that
flake when hanging off of that thing, it sounded sooooo hollow. Moving
the belay was a classic example of rectifying orginal miscalculations.
But still a studdly FA by Randy, way back when.
> so you HAD to stop at the death flake" Pieper
If its still attached, then perhaps it is not quite so serious of a
threat as one imagines, ala Candleabra or is it the Ork, I get so
confused these days.
Pat
RKVOGEL
way):
>> I believe the second station was added after it became apparantthat the
>> first station was placed in a large detached flake of rock.
>
>Well, that, and the fact that if you stop at the >first belay and the next.
leader falls on the >10b crux (now the first moves of Pitch 2)
>you've set him up for a Factor 2 (or damn >close to it) fall on said detached
flake belay....Wheeeeeee!!!
The belay at the so-called death flake (the 1st belay) wasn't planned. I had
just climbed up to and placed the bolt at the beginning of the traverse (1/4
inch hand drilled job, eeeek!). I began the traverse and got to the flake. I
"placed" a medium size stopper behind the left side of the flake and continued
traversing (I could not let go with 2 hands to place a bolt here).
I tried the crux section of the route (getting to the ledge [now 2nd belay
site] several times, nearly whipping off several times. I actually got my pinky
on the near side of the ledge. I kept retreating to the relative security of
the flake to rest and re-psyche. The nut was worthless and I finally gave up
(rather than go for the 40-50+ foot swinging fall. (What a wimp!)
Anyway I put a hook on the flake (considered pretty so-so ethics-wise back in
the stone ages) and drilled a bolt. I fugure since I was hanging there and
tired to boot, I would make it the belay. The 2nd lead was completed with the
more secure protection (the belay anchor). A protection bolt was placed on the
ledge where the 2nd belay is now located.
I have had absolutely no problem with the belay relocation (done years later
when all the crummy 1/4 bolts were replaced) as this is where I intended to
have the belay originally. The only disadvantage of the 2nd belay site is that
a single 165 foot rope will not reach doubled (you can't bail) to the ground
from here. I always belay at the 2nd belay now, and this is the recommended way
of climbing the route (although belaying at the 1st station will give a chance
to rest or change leaders).
Though the flake has been called dicey for years, I am not sure how bad it is.
The bolts did not sound hollow when they went in, though one really never
knows, do they?
>Furthermore, the second station is far more >comfortable than hanging in your
harness.
You said it.
Hope this is of interest and clears up the mystery.
Randy (older than even Rex) Vogel
Inez Drixelius
(RKVOGEL) wrote:
snip very interesting and informative FA report...
> Hope this is of interest and clears up the mystery.
> Randy (older than even Rex) Vogel
Thanks, Randy, for this wonderful post. This is what rec.climbing is all
about, really! I appreciate this sort of participation enormously!
Inez
--
Inez Drixelius
Berkeley, California
"Real women wear knee pads"
ka...@my-dejanews.com
> Randy wrote:
> snip very interesting and informative FA report...
> > Hope this is of interest and clears up the mystery.
> > Randy (older than even Rex) Vogel
> Thanks, Randy, for this wonderful post. This is what rec.climbing is all
> about, really! I appreciate this sort of participation enormously!
>
> Inez
To extend Inez' definition... This is, at least in part, what *climbing* is
all about. Few sports afford such easy and enriching proximity to deep roots
as does our sport, in which a relative neophyte can say Hi to Peter Croft
every morning for a week at Josh, shake Royal Robbins' hand after one of his
talks then go climb his routes at Tahquitz, or read first-person,
conversational, posts like Randy's about pioneering a classic. Thanks to
Randy and, not just all the greats, but all the experienced climbers out
there who take the time to pass on the joy the sport has given them. Climbing
would not be climbing without you.
-- Ian
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
ka...@my-dejanews.com
> Randy wrote:
> snip very interesting and informative FA report...
> > Hope this is of interest and clears up the mystery.
> Thanks, Randy, for this wonderful post. This is what rec.climbing is all
> about, really! I appreciate this sort of participation enormously!
To extend the definition... This kind of ready access to historical roots is,
at least in part, what climbing is all about. Few sports offer the grounding
available (even to a relative newbie) in experiences like hearing Royal
Robbins talk about pioneering the Open Book, then going to Tahquitz and
climbing it; saying “morning” to Peter Croft at Josh, then watching him
scamper up and down Intersection Rock like, well, like Peter Croft; or
reading informative, conversational posts from pioneers like Randy. Thanks to
Randy and all the experienced climbers who take the time and energy to give
us the firm footholds from which we stretch upwards.
Andy Gale
ka...@my-dejanews.com wrote in article <7377b4$a1q$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> Inez wrote:
>
> > Randy wrote:
> > snip very interesting and informative FA report...
> > > Hope this is of interest and clears up the mystery.
> > Thanks, Randy, for this wonderful post. This is what rec.climbing is
all
> > about, really! I appreciate this sort of participation enormously!
>
> To extend the definition... This kind of ready access to historical roots
is,
> at least in part, what climbing is all about.
Isn't it just a bit ironic that Randy does not have any FA info in his JT
guidebook? :) No offense intended Randy. I like your guidebook and use
it all the time. But hey, if that FA info was in there I would have known
when I climbed it that you had the FA of Figures on a Landscape.
Andy
PS. I also know that r.c has been around and about on this issue before.
I just couldn't resist.
Duncan Thomson
It's a masterpiece of a route. I owe you one!
The first belay didn't seem at all loose or hollow to me. (I guess you
never know
though.)
RKVOGEL wrote:
>
> Rex and others ruminate re: the 1st belay on Figures (at Joshua Tree NP by the
> way):
>
> >Well, that, and the fact that if you stop at the >first belay and the next.
> leader falls on the >10b crux (now the first moves of Pitch 2)
> >you've set him up for a Factor 2 (or damn >close to it) fall on said detached
> flake belay....Wheeeeeee!!!
Rex, I beg to differ here. It's not even close to Factor 2. It's
almost a horizontal traverse from that belay station, so it's more like
jumping off a rope swing than taking a leader fall.
Duncan
RKVOGEL
>Isn't it just a bit ironic that Randy does not >have any FA info in his JT
guidebook? :) >No offense intended Randy. I like your >guidebook and use it
all the time. But hey, if >that FA info was in there I would have >known when
I climbed it that you had the FA >of Figures on a Landscape.
Though discussed often, this is a valid critique of the guide. The problem
faced with the last edition was the additional 80+ pages that including FA info
would add to an already huge guide. I have been giving the info to Alan
Bartlett who has included it and other info in his guides.
But, I am currently working on a new edition (release late 1999 or early 2000).
I will probably include FA info, maybe like John Steiger's Mt. Lemon guide
(initials of individuals only and date, with a key to the initials in an
index). In this way, the info should not add too much bulk to the guide, but
will be available to people for whom this is of interest. The new guide should
include approx. 5500 routes, new maps, etc.
Corrections (ratings, descriptions, or otherwise) are VERY welcome. You can
email or reg mail me with any info (FA or otherwise). I am trying to correct
mistakes in the last guide, so don't be shy about pointing out matters that may
seem obvious.
Randy
Inez Drixelius
<ag...@scripps.edu> wrote:
> Isn't it just a bit ironic that Randy does not have any FA info in his JT
> guidebook? :) No offense intended Randy. I like your guidebook and use
> it all the time. But hey, if that FA info was in there I would have known
> when I climbed it that you had the FA of Figures on a Landscape.
>
Unrelated to the Tree, the new(er) Tuolumne Guide no longer lists first
ascents. This is a real problem, because a first ascent information was
often indicative a climb's specific troubles, such as run-out... Besides,
it is nice to see who did what AND even recognize a rec.climber on
occasion! The mind boggles, doesn't it?
MadBolter
> Though discussed often, this is a valid critique of the guide. The
> problem faced with the last edition was the additional 80+ pages
> that including FA info would add to an already huge guide.
C'mon Randy... ;-) you wasted a lot of space with the "Routes by Rating"
check-off section, (WHO USES THIS??) and the Index pages could have
used space more effectively...between the two, you used 60 pages!
I'm sure there is a way to dramatically reduce this page count.
You can't really use the defense that the guide was already too huge to
put in FA info...especially when you burn pages for Check Off's, & "Trivia
Quizzes." Yes it's kinda funny, and some of the questions are WAY
obscure, but don't tell me you didn't have space for what many consider
ESSENTIAL information. (Sheesh!)
Your concept of using initials and a "KEY" page is one with merit.
I guess this begs the question...why didn't you use it for your last guide?
The concept has been around awhile...I'll give you the benefit of the
doubt and assume that you just didn't consider it. Am I right?
Also, if you use the initials and key, please don't drop out the FA date
either.
I'd far rather have the FA info than Trivia Quizzes, Check Off Boxes, etc.
(NOT because my name appears here and there, but) because of the
previously mentioned points of having an inkling of whether the route is
runout, sandbagged, whatnot due to a familiarity with the style of the
first ascentionist...not to mention being able to talk to those who put
the routes up (as we have been doing in the Figures On A Landscape
discussion) or even give credit to bold ascents. Guidebooks without this
info rob us of our history.
Ok, enough harping on the FA listing...here's another thing I want to see...
I miss the actual topographic maps that appeared in the Purple
Monster...those helped immensely when you're slogging through the maze
of the Wonderland or Queen Mountain or Oz...bring them back!!! (I've
carried both guides on occasions for just this item!)
-Rex "I think we're behind this little blob here...Did you bring a
headlamp?" Pieper
Andy Gale
MadBolter <madb...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19981124185027...@ng-fr1.aol.com>...
> Randy Vogel wrote:
>
> > Though discussed often, this is a valid critique of the guide. The
> > problem faced with the last edition was the additional 80+ pages
> > that including FA info would add to an already huge guide.
>
> C'mon Randy... ;-) you wasted a lot of space with the "Routes by
Rating"
> check-off section, (WHO USES THIS??)
Me.
Andy
--
*******************************************************
Andrew Gale The Scripps Research Institute
ag...@scripps.edu La Jolla, CA
*******************************************************
MadBolter
> MadBolter <madb...@aol.com> wrote in article
> > C'mon Randy... ;-) you wasted a lot of space with the "Routes by
Rating"
> > check-off section, (WHO USES THIS??)
> Me.
I tried to use it, but eventually gave up. I found that I preferred to put
a date next to the Route I climbed on the actual page in the guide,
along with any pertinent info (pro, descent, sizes, runout nature, etc.)
Maybe I'm alone on this...I just think that maybe both the Routes by
Rating and the Route Index w/ page numbers can be combined...perhaps
Routes by Rating with page numbers.
-Rex Pieper
Robert Fonda
routes by rating index goes, that's real nice for us mere mortals. We
definitely do not have the time under our belts or the knowledge of the area
like you do and more experienced climbers. I would very much like to see FA
info with full names, not just initials. Also, I absolutely agree with
having a topo included in the guide for areas like the Wonderland. I have a
separate topo I carry for just that purpose. It would be nice.
r.f