The Waltz Variation

[Fred]

I've been looking at new routes on Upper Tier and I spoted an interesting line the other day but it is a bit controversial. Thought I'd bring it up for discussion. The route would basicaly cruise past the two bolts on The Waltz but instead of trending right up the layback corner, you would continue straight up the face. Thus, my question is, is it wrong to use the first two bolts in a route if the finish (40' or so) is completely separate?

[martha]

I think it is just fine. The line looks stellar and should be climbed.

The waltz is a great route, and this is just a variation finish in a sense. there are many variations in Welsford. It could be named something considering a variation on the waltz. the rhumba, or tango or dancing queen. hahahah.

anyways, you get my point.

do it.

[PaulB]

... is it wrong to use the first two bolts in a route if the finish (40' or so) is completely separate?

I'd say this is a generally accepted practice at a lot of crags. This topo (PDF) for the Cheakamus crags near Squamish has several examples of routes sharing bolts.

Whether or not the new line is a route or a variation would be a matter of debate, but as long as it doesn't detract from the existing route, I doubt anyone would complain. In the past, the criteria was often whether or not new bolts could be clipped from an existing route. The reasoning being that if they could be clipped, the new line was probably too close and would change the nature of the existing climb.

[Guest]

do it

[Guest]

so long as you can't clip any fixed pro from the original route, go for it. probably wouldn't be proper to re-name but called the waltz direct or something like that would be ok.