Sunday, July 10, 2005
I've commented before on grade logarithimics & grading styles, but this has been bugging me for some time, especially as I work towards the completion of the big Coire link-up.
Just how many V15 or V16 problems have a uk technical grade that comes close to equalling the V15 or V16 tag per move. And how many of these high end problems work on an accumalitive effect of several, sometimes even multiple cruxs linked by rests of physoclogical & physical lay-byes. Thus in cases such as Dai's extensively long [76moves] Wheel of Life, V16, or with the Longridge Traverse, [F8c but not a move harder than 6b] moves & cruxs need only to be in the uk 6b - uk 7a to achieve the mark.
But what of a 3 or 5 move V15? An 8 move V16? Where does the uk technical standard rest? uk 6c+ ? 7a? 7b? or uk 8a or 8b?...
In the logarthimic scale, the movement of a pure crux sequence at the high end, I feel, should relate as closely as possible to the conclusive V-grade, rather than be a partly influencial factor on the overall difficulty.
With my new V15 in the Coire, Eat Yourself Whole, exactly the same philosophy has been applied. There are no lay-byes, no easy pull-on moves & no physcological rests, one because of it's short 10-12ft length & two becuase the rocks own formation simply doesn't allow it. With the Coire link-up project passing under It's Over the process is much the same, as it will be with the An-tSúil sport project, which will basically be a nasty V14/15 crux at 180° on 6 or so bolts, with f8a climbing either side, no rests throughout, hopefully when the drilling & bolting is complete. Klem apparently also works to the same philosophy, when he works new problems, & it makes absolute sense to me. Are we getting more high level problems with an undeveloped uk tech standard becuase people have found they can go further & further, or is it becuase people have upped their technical ability & can string 5 moves together, close to what V15 equates to in uk technical standards? These roaming 10 mile problems are the only way I see the fanciful notion of grade creep being exploited in all likelyhood, yet they only challenge physical duration not the technical edge.
Dave MacLeod has commented to me, on how he can -hang on V15s abroad but can't get off the floor on some of my top end problems- & the fella is no slouch. I do focus my work though at this end [V11 up], towards equalizing the V-grade to the uk tech grade rather than hooking up cruxs in an outing you need food drops, a portaledge & a supply chopper on; & I stress, not becuase I flat-line on duration outings either. So maybe this is why. I'm trying to reduce grades by doing this, not increase them. Trying to strike a more realistic balance in both system arenas, to make sure that when you get on a V15, you better be prepared to climb at, or someway close to, the equivelent uk technical grade it suggests. I'm not saying both grades can be ultimately levelled, but pushing towards it will bring a clearer balance of what is expected when a high end V number is mooted. Just as you would expect uk 6c to be thin, expect V15 to be logarthimically, much thinner & with this understood, purer & harder than many European counterparts. Ideally then, if you cannot climb V14 or 15, none of the holds should be able to be hung as independants, nor should sections of sequences be possible.
I have various, almost scarily scientific scribblings knocking around, some screwed up like paper crysanthumums, which I'll tidy up soon & try to put into jpeg format for the web & post here to give you some suggestive pictorial [graphs] ideas of what I believe is possible & what is remedial. The past few years of focusing towards carrying the philosophy into active problems is progressively yielding more & more furious results.
Just how many V15 or V16 problems have a uk technical grade that comes close to equalling the V15 or V16 tag per move. And how many of these high end problems work on an accumalitive effect of several, sometimes even multiple cruxs linked by rests of physoclogical & physical lay-byes. Thus in cases such as Dai's extensively long [76moves] Wheel of Life, V16, or with the Longridge Traverse, [F8c but not a move harder than 6b] moves & cruxs need only to be in the uk 6b - uk 7a to achieve the mark.
But what of a 3 or 5 move V15? An 8 move V16? Where does the uk technical standard rest? uk 6c+ ? 7a? 7b? or uk 8a or 8b?...
In the logarthimic scale, the movement of a pure crux sequence at the high end, I feel, should relate as closely as possible to the conclusive V-grade, rather than be a partly influencial factor on the overall difficulty.
With my new V15 in the Coire, Eat Yourself Whole, exactly the same philosophy has been applied. There are no lay-byes, no easy pull-on moves & no physcological rests, one because of it's short 10-12ft length & two becuase the rocks own formation simply doesn't allow it. With the Coire link-up project passing under It's Over the process is much the same, as it will be with the An-tSúil sport project, which will basically be a nasty V14/15 crux at 180° on 6 or so bolts, with f8a climbing either side, no rests throughout, hopefully when the drilling & bolting is complete. Klem apparently also works to the same philosophy, when he works new problems, & it makes absolute sense to me. Are we getting more high level problems with an undeveloped uk tech standard becuase people have found they can go further & further, or is it becuase people have upped their technical ability & can string 5 moves together, close to what V15 equates to in uk technical standards? These roaming 10 mile problems are the only way I see the fanciful notion of grade creep being exploited in all likelyhood, yet they only challenge physical duration not the technical edge.
Dave MacLeod has commented to me, on how he can -hang on V15s abroad but can't get off the floor on some of my top end problems- & the fella is no slouch. I do focus my work though at this end [V11 up], towards equalizing the V-grade to the uk tech grade rather than hooking up cruxs in an outing you need food drops, a portaledge & a supply chopper on; & I stress, not becuase I flat-line on duration outings either. So maybe this is why. I'm trying to reduce grades by doing this, not increase them. Trying to strike a more realistic balance in both system arenas, to make sure that when you get on a V15, you better be prepared to climb at, or someway close to, the equivelent uk technical grade it suggests. I'm not saying both grades can be ultimately levelled, but pushing towards it will bring a clearer balance of what is expected when a high end V number is mooted. Just as you would expect uk 6c to be thin, expect V15 to be logarthimically, much thinner & with this understood, purer & harder than many European counterparts. Ideally then, if you cannot climb V14 or 15, none of the holds should be able to be hung as independants, nor should sections of sequences be possible.
I have various, almost scarily scientific scribblings knocking around, some screwed up like paper crysanthumums, which I'll tidy up soon & try to put into jpeg format for the web & post here to give you some suggestive pictorial [graphs] ideas of what I believe is possible & what is remedial. The past few years of focusing towards carrying the philosophy into active problems is progressively yielding more & more furious results.
∞ - ∞ - ∞ - ∞ - ∞ - ∞
I think the UK grading system is flawed because it was invented for routes. It isn't really applicable and it is not an arithmetic scale like the V-grade system tries to be. When climbing at the top level, opinion of grade can fluctuate greatly, Malc Smith reckons Dreamtime, supposedly V15, is more like V14. but then there are other problems, like Bernabe Fernandez, who says his f9b+ is specialised to him, i.e tufas, crimps and edges at which he is good. I, like you, have a long term project... apparently it's V4 6a but it seems more like V6 6b... but that's for me, a teenager with no reach. There, my opinion on the subject, just thought i'd say what i think.
Yours, Andi e