welsford grade questions

[john]

I was thinking about some welsford classics and how they compared to one another. Lots of people ask me for input on which routes to do and I find the grading and/or stigma of certain routes often scares them off unnecessarily. I find the welsford trad routes which are intimidating get overgraded, considering grades should be given based on routes difficulty not fear factor. I find often the steeper routes are graded harder, as most people hang out way to long second guessing their gear rather than just placing it and going to avoid the pump. Sometimes when gear is tricky or hard to place even from optimal stances the pump factor actually forces the route harder than it would otherwise be, but most often it s people placing from in-optimal positions that make the route seem hard.

Some examples in my books.

Pink panther 10a - correct I think
Flight of the Valkyries 11a - I think it is steep and pumpy but the holds are all massive you just need the confidence to climb to a jug and place the gear there. there is no move on it harder than pink panther.
Sticky Fingers 10d - More like 10b/c I think.
Catholic girls 10b - more like 10c/d to me the move is actually hard at the crux well protected there though.
Rock Opera 10b - Solid for the grade
Gumby roof 10a - Probably about correct definitely intimidating but every hold in the roof is huge and incut, above and below the roof is 5.8.
Cheek bone 5.7 - I think the route is intimidating and the one overhanging move is steep but on jugs. I think this move is about accurate if you are not scared but I bet if both that move and the pink panther move and the gumby move were all boulder problems they would be within a grade of each other. So is cheekbone harder or the others easier? All three could be climbed by anyone I think if they were near the ground and shown how to do it?
Montezumas - If this route was where cheekbone crux is it would be mid 12. It is sequence dependent but beacuse you can stand on the ground and work it with no intimidation its undergraded to me?

Is fear a factor in grades in welsford?

[Fred]

Sticky Fingers is 5.10b in the new book.

Cheekbone 5.7 refers to the dihedral below pigeon flowers ledge. Not the free hang move which is 5.5. I think this grade is accurate.

Montezuma's should be 12a.


I don't think fear is a factor in grades as much as just difference in climbers grading them. Some people grade soft, some people grade sandbag and some people grade differently depending on the day. I can, or should say usta could, climb 5.12 overhanging but always struggled on 5.10 crack. It's relative I think.

[Adam]

I was thinking about some welsford classics and how they compared to one another. Lots of people ask me for input on which routes to do and I find the grading and/or stigma of certain routes often scares them off unnecessarily. I find the welsford trad routes which are intimidating get overgraded, considering grades should be given based on routes difficulty not fear factor. I find often the steeper routes are graded harder, as most people hang out way to long second guessing their gear rather than just placing it and going to avoid the pump. Sometimes when gear is tricky or hard to place even from optimal stances the pump factor actually forces the route harder than it would otherwise be, but most often it s people placing from in-optimal positions that make the route seem hard.

Some examples in my books.

Pink panther 10a - correct I think
Flight of the Valkyries 11a - I think it is steep and pumpy but the holds are all massive you just need the confidence to climb to a jug and place the gear there. there is no move on it harder than pink panther.
Sticky Fingers 10d - More like 10b/c I think.
Catholic girls 10b - more like 10c/d to me the move is actually hard at the crux well protected there though.
Rock Opera 10b - Solid for the grade
Gumby roof 10a - Probably about correct definitely intimidating but every hold in the roof is huge and incut, above and below the roof is 5.8.
Cheek bone 5.7 - I think the route is intimidating and the one overhanging move is steep but on jugs. I think this move is about accurate if you are not scared but I bet if both that move and the pink panther move and the gumby move were all boulder problems they would be within a grade of each other. So is cheekbone harder or the others easier? All three could be climbed by anyone I think if they were near the ground and shown how to do it?
Montezumas - If this route was where cheekbone crux is it would be mid 12. It is sequence dependent but beacuse you can stand on the ground and work it with no intimidation its undergraded to me?

Is fear a factor in grades in welsford?

i disagree with everything you said. no supporting statements.

[Adam]

i disagree with everything you said. no supporting statements.

FYI i'm just bitter about my ankle....

[*Chris*]

Sub-optimal stances and inability to work out the crux are both defining characteristics of onsighting. The grades are supposed to reflect difficulty to onsight for most people (the population median) right?

[bns]

Sub-optimal stances and inability to work out the crux are both defining characteristics of onsighting. The grades are supposed to reflect difficulty to onsight for most people (the population median) right?

Yeah I've heard that before about onsight grade. It definetely doesn't hold up in sport climbing.

[GKelly]

I think this topic goes at around 5.16c. Havn't we (I'm guilty too) gotten a little too obsessed with grading. Take hot sauce for example. We are perfectly fine with mild, medium, hot, very hot, and blow your mind hot. When in fact there are tonnes of different microtastic* levels of hottness. But no one cares, because it's fun to simply get out there and taste the flames. I hate spicey food by the way. Except on curry. What was I ranting about again?
I really have no input on the grading system. Ok that's a lie. I think that we analize it too much. If we are going to complicate it more than it is we might as well implement height classes and really mess everyone up. So... I can climb 5.6 and I am 4'8". That's probably the same difficulty as a 6' tall person climbing 5.11. Are we both actually climbing at 5.9? Or maybe I am climbing at HC "4'6" -4'10" 5.11".
Anyway, I've noticed that climbers in and from the east have a unique ability to be super stoked weather they are climbing 5.7 or 5.11. It makes for an awsome atmosphere. So try not to fall into the grade trap.

P.S. I'm actually 4'10"

[*Chris*]

Yeah I've heard that before about onsight grade. It definetely doesn't hold up in sport climbing.

Maybe not... but none of the above are sport climbs.

[Adam]

i think all those grades are close enough. grading is an art, not a science, and a communal art form at that... but yah from what i understand, YDS defines grades for the onsight and as such the route can be technically easier than it is graded, given good stances and being able to see placements etc from the ground before starting vs not being able to... leading trad is a head game and the psychological side of it should play a role on the grading scheme for onsight leading.

the grading in welsford is fine for the most part. all within a couple letter grades...

[chossmonkey]

but yah from what i understand, YDS defines grades for the onsight and as such the route can be technically easier than it is graded, given good stances and being able to see placements etc from the ground before starting vs not being able to...

I don't think the YDS differentiates between OS and RP. Granted when it was developed OS was the name of the game.

A route being technically easier than the given grade is because the route can be rated for the hardest single move or the accumulation of moves if there are no rests between, which ever is hardest. Whether a route is rated for OS or RP is a local decision. Generally the harder that routes get the more work is put into them to do them clean and aren't OS for the FA so it would seem silly to rate it for an OS even if it will be OS in the future. If the difference between the two is only a letter grade then it is really just splitting hairs, but generally OS grades lead to downgrading by later generations.

[Burley]

John,

I can see how a trad route could get graded harder than if it were a sport line. Right or wrong? I couldn't say, but the pump factor should weight in. One single move on the monkey bars might only be 5.6, but if you have to do 20 of those in a row maybe it should jump it up to 5.9?

Should fear weight in? I say no because it is very subjective - more so than grade. For me a tricky move 10 feet off the deck is more frightening than the same move 40 feet above the last ledge. Ground hard... air soft.

I would say it is more the stigma associated with a route than the grade that scares off a lot of folks. The word stigma implies that something is unacceptable... gear rating or potential for slamming into the face or a ledge after pulling a roof or a tricky move. Stigma isn't always a bad thing for a route to have... may keep someone among the walking a bit longer.

I find the stigma goes away for individuals as they climb harder and harder... more and more. Not every route should be runout. And not every route should be climbed if it is at your limit. However, some routes should be spicy and left to a time when you are climbing a number grade higher than the route grade... not a bad thing. Not every route should be one that anyone can jump on that can hang a draw and not get hurt if they fall at any point. Not every route should be one that can be "worked and dialed" when a bolt or placement every 4 feet. Nice to have a few that require a "Man up Beaver" moment.

I feel that some of the ones you named can provide that moment if you are climbing at your limit. I've been on three of the ones you have listed and two gave me a moment like that... good times.

Since I haven't climbed all the routes you listed I'm probably a good example of the person you're talking about. I will get on the other four... at some point. My reason for not getting on them up to this point is the stigma, fear of pain, and weather in one case. It isn't the grade, steepness or the exposure. I can't climb 11s, but I've tried a few times. I can climb some 10s, but there a lots of 10s I haven't jumped on. I can climb 5.9... not a lot of those left in Welsford that I haven't been on... but there are a couple. Maybe at the end of next season there won't be a lot of 10s I haven't gotten on.

I'm still walking so I say the stigma is a good thing in some cases. Make your own calls... know when to listen to others and when to ignore.

Whether a route is 10a, 10c, or 11a isn't what will make the decision for me - it'll be the stigma (how bad could the falls be if I think I will fall, gear qaulity and rating) and how I'm feeling that day.

There is a 5.8 I'm yet to do because the gear blows... it's the stigma. I don't care if a route is rated with D and should be B or if someone tells me it is exposed... that won't make the decision for me.

[STeveA]

Before you can really discuss grades you have to make it clear what the intent of the grading system is. When I started climbing in England we had Easy, Difficult, Hard and Extreme. Since then the grades have been sub-divided. The grades in England reflect the overall climb including technical difficulty and/or commitment. Therefore, a easy but scary climb could have the same grade as a hard but safe climb. With this system you need more information than just the grade.

The YDS system initially reflected the hardest technical move on the climb. The X and R ratings were added to give an indication of the risk, but the grade only reflected the hardest technical move. The intent is to let someone with little knowledge of the route know what they are getting into ahead of time. Therefore, the YDS is intended for onsight lead climbers. If there is a trick or a set of sequences that make the climb easier the question becomes how obvious are the moves to the onsight leader.

I made the first onsight of Sticky Fingers and the tricky part of that route is placing protection. You cannot see the placements until after you make hard moves. Once you have climbed the route and know that the placements will appear it is definitely easier, however whatever grade Don Beliveau gave it was accurate.

The crux moves on Cheekbone, as you go through the V just below Pigeon flowers ledge, are exposed and not what I would call jugs. 5.7 is a good grade for the moves, however they are not in the same class as the moves on Pink Panther. Pink Panther is a solid 5.10a. If you find them to be similar in grade I would suggest that you are climbing Cheekbone by a different route. I have seen more falls on the move as you go past the overhang on Pink Panther than any other climb in Welsford (not including sport climbs).

Montezumas is definitely a debatable grade. It took me a long time to get the red point, but when it did go it felt like 5.6. It was graded by comparing it to other climbs in the area at the time. The main climbs it was compared to were Tipsy and farewell to Arms, since they were all put up about the same time. At the time these climbs were definitely pushing our limits so the grades are probably not as accurate as the lower grade climbs. The 5.7, 8, 9 and 10s in Welsford were always compared to Bar harbor and North Conway climbs. I think you will find the grades in that level very close to similar climbs in New England, however the harder climbs were graded in isolation from other areas.

Any of the trad climbs that were graded back in the good old days were graded on the basis of the hardest move as though you were leading it for the first time. We were careful not to regrade climbs as we became more familiar with them. The intent was to give climbers new to the climb a reasonable idea of what they were getting themselves into before they got into trouble. If the climbing skills, equipment and the climbs themselves have changed then it is reasonable to consider changing the grades so that all climbs in an area are consistent. As long as the guide book to the area keeps track of the area history this should not be a big deal.

[Adam]

I don't think the YDS differentiates between OS and RP. Granted when it was developed OS was the name of the game.

but why would this have changed? onsight is still the 'purer' ethic... redpointing is more common these days, but to me that doesn't change the reason for grades, which is basically a heads up as to whether you should even bother with a route.

it's not like YDS is a scientific standard that has been defined definitively somewhere, but everyone i've talked to about it agrees that grading for the onsight just makes the most sense. if you are wanting to climb something you haven't been on before, do you want it graded as though you have no beta? or as though you've cleaned every hold and know it upside down? obviously you'd want the former, b/c it would give you a better idea of whether you're going to be able to send onsight.

every route i've put up i've graded for the onsight. some of the routes are very beta oriented and would be graded easier if you knew all the beta (mono on thundrrr that's a key hold is a prime example).

[Nihoa]

climbing is the official sport of unfairness. every body type leads to a climbing style which will make some routes easy for you and others impossible. often times i cant clip bolts from good holds cus im a midget but im not complaining when the holds get tiny. some routes feel full number grades harder, others less though i usually dont complain about the latter.

fret not, the solution is easy. unb rock and ice memberships are only $50 and after a winter of pulling plastic in our sweaty little gym you will be both strong enough and just plain happy to be outside that the grades will be far from your mind.

[*Chris*]

Good plug Mark! However, I've come to the belief that over a large enough number of routes, physical body type (at least in terms of height), doesn't impact on your grade capability. That is unless you are at the extreme ends of the range. Which you aren't. Obviously.

[Nihoa]

yep chris, my point exactly. stretchy, scrunchy, crimpy, slopey, pinchy, pockety. you cant be good at 'em all. people get too hung up on the odd ego-bruiser to see the big picture.

[JonA]

The variables involved in grading a route is the reason I don't usually bother with letter grades when grading new routes. Also I suck at grading.

Before I lead anything moderately difficult I'm more interested in what protection will be available, no fall areas and the general direction of the route, than whether it is 10a or 10c.

[Stacey]

you've got to read the whole article to enjoy the humour of it:

http://bluegrassbouldering.wordpress.co ... conundrum/

Stacey