Funny "Euro" Practice

Everything and anything to do with climbing in Squamish.
meingh
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:18 pm

Post by meingh » Mon Jun 25, 2007 9:08 pm

The reason you didn't give us a definition is because there is no clear definition. If you disagree post the definition.

You can't define a redpoint because it's a lot like defining what a 5.10a no body really knows it's all subjective
Definition: (Subjective)
taking place within the mind and modified by individual bias; "a subjective judgment"
What a redpoint is, is not easy to define because it is subjective.

I'll give my best shot at a definition of an onsight:

"Climbing the route from the ground up, first time, with no assistance, without falling, until you reach the top."

This isn't really a clear definition because it leave open to much subjective interpretation. That is why it does not meet your previous requirements
clearly defined..... but especially for the purposes of keeping a record of what was done, you have to observe those definitions.
So if I want to keep a record of what I have done how should I do that? Based on everything posted above how do i know what a redpoint or onsight is ???


AND to answer your question I always like playing devils advocate because it's fun and it keeps the conversation going BUT in this case you are clear just wrong :) I also find that fun :lol:

mcgarnickle
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:30 pm
Location: Coquitlam

Post by mcgarnickle » Tue Jun 26, 2007 5:56 am

Ok, how is your definition of onsight subjective? It is exactly the same as I would have said, or as is accepted understanding by everyone. And please, here by everyone I don't mean some gumby who is outside toproping for the first time. I am talking about someone who's been climbing long enough to care about making an onsight.
Now without introducing some other random elements, such as gear being preplaced, stickclips, or other superfluous details, I really don't see any ambiguity or grayness in that definition. I mean hell, its almost legal!
The same thing for the other terms, redpoints and flashes. I am starting to just repeat myself at this point.

As far as the comparison to the grades, saying you can't define 5.10, that is true but only a bit. If nothing else, 5.10 can be quantitatively defined as being harder than 5.9 and easier than 5.11. That is inarguable, the values of those however are.

But check this out, since you already started proving my point by defining onsight the same as I would, lets play it this way: Give me an example of a climb which some other experienced climber would call onsight within the definition which both you and I share but we would not consider legitimate OS? Something to illustrate one of those gray areas you insist exist but do not specifically name.

Steve J

meingh
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:18 pm

Post by meingh » Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:31 am

OK :)

Onsite: "Climbing the route from the ground up, first time, with no assistance, without falling, until you reach the top."

Two climbers both try to onsite a route.

Climber one has never heard of the route gets on it only knowing the grade, puts the draws up and sends it, without falling and the belayer is silent, there are no ticks or draws up which makes it hard because there are a lot of hidden holds and the clips are very strenous.

Climber two knows of the route because he's from the area and its a popular route. he tries it for the first time after seeing pictures of his friends pulling through the crux and rumours that the clips are hard and that there are hidden holds. He climbs it after a bunch of people session it so all the key holds are ticked with large chalk marks. He climbs to the crux and realizes he can't do it, down climbs to the ground and rest there for four hours, did I mention all of the clips are up and most are extended to make it easier to clip them from the rests, he tries to get through the crux again but finds he's not efficent enough on the bottom so down climbs and rests on the ground again, finally he has memorized the bottom sequence flies through the crux because there are tick marks on the hidden crux hold and sends the route.

Based on this post they are both Onsites. Here are the problems, with the definition:

"Climbing the route from the ground up, first time, with no assistance, without falling, until you reach the top."

first time= subjective due to the whole down climbing to the start and resting for hours

no assistance = subjective due to the 1000's of different types of assistance you can get.

If you want a pure cut and dry definition then it should truly be no assistance, in that case if you describe every onsite you think you've done we could probably poke holes in it. Most of the Onsites you see in magazines are BS because there is some form of assistance, draws up etc.

You can't ignore all these little things because they effect the difficulty of the route, as in my example.

As for the grading comment:
As far as the comparison to the grades, saying you can't define 5.10, that is true but only a bit. If nothing else, 5.10 can be quantitatively defined as being harder than 5.9 and easier than 5.11. That is inarguable, the values of those however are.
My point is grading is subjective, even in your example above, i agree 5.10 is harder than 5.9 an easier than 5.11 but my point is ALL OF THIS STUFF IS SUBJECTIVE, not cut and dry definitions.

Brendan
Posting Maniac
Posting Maniac
Posts: 714
Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2006 7:36 pm
Location: North Shore

Post by Brendan » Tue Jun 26, 2007 10:52 am

neither agreeing nor disagreeing on the whole climbing up then downclimbing, resting, then freeing it after idea, but i feel it could be maybe possibly 'cheating,' if you will. i for one am guilty of doing this practice, but only a couple of feet off the ground. to climb up to the crux on Freewill, only to be shut down by the last few moves, then reverse the whole climb back through Gom Jabbar to the ground (highly unlikely, but a good example), then return later and climb it clean. this seems like that person would be almost rehearsing the moves, and ready for the pump/ crux. and in turn, climbing much more efficiently than the would have to begin w/. then to call it an OS? i appreciate the effort going into the send, but is it really and OS, or a 1's try (or 2nd try) redpoint??
my $0.02

User avatar
Pete L.
Posting Maniac
Posting Maniac
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 7:59 am
Location: Langley

Post by Pete L. » Tue Jun 26, 2007 1:19 pm

In the climbing news recently Steve Mclure did a "real" onsight of a 14a route because as he stated he placed all the draws on the go.
This makes every other 14a onsight invalid if the definition of an onsight includes placing the draws. Gray area???

Here's a good addendum to the original post: go to 8a.nu - Articles - "Redpoit, Freepoint and Preclipping"

mcgarnickle
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:30 pm
Location: Coquitlam

Post by mcgarnickle » Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:54 pm

meingh wrote:OK :)

Onsite: "Climbing the route from the ground up, first time, with no assistance, without falling, until you reach the top."

Two climbers both try to onsite a route.

Climber one has never heard of the route gets on it only knowing the grade, puts the draws up and sends it, without falling and the belayer is silent, there are no ticks or draws up which makes it hard because there are a lot of hidden holds and the clips are very strenous.

Climber two knows of the route because he's from the area and its a popular route. he tries it for the first time after seeing pictures of his friends pulling through the crux and rumours that the clips are hard and that there are hidden holds. He climbs it after a bunch of people session it so all the key holds are ticked with large chalk marks. He climbs to the crux and realizes he can't do it, down climbs to the ground and rest there for four hours, did I mention all of the clips are up and most are extended to make it easier to clip them from the rests, he tries to get through the crux again but finds he's not efficent enough on the bottom so down climbs and rests on the ground again, finally he has memorized the bottom sequence flies through the crux because there are tick marks on the hidden crux hold and sends the route.

Based on this post they are both Onsites. Here are the problems, with the definition:

"Climbing the route from the ground up, first time, with no assistance, without falling, until you reach the top."

first time= subjective due to the whole down climbing to the start and resting for hours

no assistance = subjective due to the 1000's of different types of assistance you can get.

If you want a pure cut and dry definition then it should truly be no assistance, in that case if you describe every onsite you think you've done we could probably poke holes in it. Most of the Onsites you see in magazines are BS because there is some form of assistance, draws up etc.

You can't ignore all these little things because they effect the difficulty of the route, as in my example.

As for the grading comment:
As far as the comparison to the grades, saying you can't define 5.10, that is true but only a bit. If nothing else, 5.10 can be quantitatively defined as being harder than 5.9 and easier than 5.11. That is inarguable, the values of those however are.
My point is grading is subjective, even in your example above, i agree 5.10 is harder than 5.9 an easier than 5.11 but my point is ALL OF THIS STUFF IS SUBJECTIVE, not cut and dry definitions.

Gary, the second climber did not make an onsight ascent by your (the one we agree on) definition of onsight. We both agree an onsight is made on the "first try". The second climber tried the route, went up and then downclimbed to the ground. He made two tries on the route. He send it on his third try yes? Who would call that onsight? Certainly not me, and probably not you, and probably nobody who agrees with the definition of onsight we used:
"Climbing the route from the ground up, first time, with no assistance, without falling, until you reach the top."

Let's forget about the grades thing, those are pretty much meaningless in their values, don't get me started on From Beneath You It Devours.. 12c LOL!

mcgarnickle
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:30 pm
Location: Coquitlam

Post by mcgarnickle » Tue Jun 26, 2007 2:58 pm

Pete L. wrote:In the climbing news recently Steve Mclure did a "real" onsight of a 14a route because as he stated he placed all the draws on the go.
This makes every other 14a onsight invalid if the definition of an onsight includes placing the draws. Gray area???

Here's a good addendum to the original post: go to 8a.nu - Articles - "Redpoit, Freepoint and Preclipping"
Onsight has nothing at all to do with preplaced gear in that definition which Gary wrote and the one which is on 8a and we all use to update our scorecards. At least those of us who are not full of sh*t, you f@#ka$ know who you are.

So no, it does not invalidate all other previous onsights made on preplaced draws, and does not make this gray at all. Like I said, the definition is pretty damn airtight unless you start adding things to it which the definition does not name, such as gear.

User avatar
Pete L.
Posting Maniac
Posting Maniac
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 7:59 am
Location: Langley

Post by Pete L. » Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:01 pm

Another example:
Dean Potter first made news by onsight free-soloing a 5.13 at Mill Creek, Utah.
He climbed up to the crux several times over several days before finally committing to the crux and sending the route.
Is this really an onsight??
The climbing media seemed to think it was.
Opinions?

mcgarnickle
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:30 pm
Location: Coquitlam

Post by mcgarnickle » Tue Jun 26, 2007 3:06 pm

Pete L. wrote:Another example:
Dean Potter first made news by onsight free-soloing a 5.13 at Mill Creek, Utah.
He climbed up to the crux several times over several days before finally committing to the crux and sending the route.
Is this really an onsight??
The climbing media seemed to think it was.
Opinions?
This is like trying to debating the pending doom from the bird flu pandemic or whether Angelina Jolie is too thin or Paris Hilton was going to commit suicide in jail. Seriously, I think anybody who gobbles up the crap in the media at face value needs to have their head examined. This isn't personal so I hope I'm not offending you Pete because I know you are a bit above this.

Steve J

User avatar
Pete L.
Posting Maniac
Posting Maniac
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 7:59 am
Location: Langley

Post by Pete L. » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:20 pm

First off: Angelina Jolie is not too thin.
Second off: Paris who?
Third off: No offence taken. I've quite enjoyed the banter. Asinine or not.
Lastly: The original point of this thread seems to have been lost. I was not looking for a definition for "onsighting" or "redpointing" I was curious to see if anyone else out there fealt that the "up-climbing/down-climbing it's still an onsight" practice was b.s. I, for one, feel that it is.
That's it.

Back in town Steve? Good job on M.S. at R.R. Freakin' hard!

mcgarnickle
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 102
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:30 pm
Location: Coquitlam

Post by mcgarnickle » Tue Jun 26, 2007 8:55 pm

Pete L. wrote:First off: Angelina Jolie is not too thin.
Second off: Paris who?
Third off: No offence taken. I've quite enjoyed the banter. Asinine or not.
Lastly: The original point of this thread seems to have been lost. I was not looking for a definition for "onsighting" or "redpointing" I was curious to see if anyone else out there fealt that the "up-climbing/down-climbing it's still an onsight" practice was b.s. I, for one, feel that it is.
That's it.

Back in town Steve? Good job on M.S. at R.R. Freakin' hard!
Yes, its stupid and and makes you a liar if you post it on 8a. And yes, I have been stinking around here for ages now it seems, hardly any climbing to speak of, except living vicariously thru others' achievements. Thanks alot you roadtripping pendejo ( I mean it nicely ;)!

Oh and btw, M.S. is the most learnable route ever! First time up it seems real hard, but after a few burns, it gets hella easy. But thank you! Brilliant quality tho...
Μολὼν λάβε

Steve J

User avatar
Clive kessler
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 238
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 8:23 pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Clive kessler » Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:21 pm

If you can climb up to the crux then down climb to the ground without falling it is an onsight. Lets face it would probably be harder than just climbing the route. Imagine trying to downclimb from the 5th bolt on fleeing heifer.

This technique seems more ethical then some of the other practices onsighters have used. Climbing a nearby route - Climbing a tree - using a spoting scope.

Really who cares if one person calls it an onsight and another calls it an attempt...

PS anyone who uses 8a.nu does so because:

1) they are gay (put your own definition of 'gay' here)

2) they have no self esteem and need to show the how hard they can climb

3) they are the type of person who has a public debate about the definition of onsight

User avatar
Pete L.
Posting Maniac
Posting Maniac
Posts: 781
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 7:59 am
Location: Langley

Post by Pete L. » Wed Jun 27, 2007 6:17 am

Don't forget the most important ones:

4) they have computers at home that allow them to log on.

5) they're under 6'6", have small man syndrome, and don't get to carry a gun on a regular basis.


I, do agree with you though on the "climbing a tree or a neighbouring route" approach. B.S. as well.
But, if you can elliminate a tough 3rd or 4th clip by the up climb/down climb tactics then you'll have given yourself an unfair advantage.

User avatar
MCpl
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 1279
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 9:31 am
Location: Lower Mainland

Post by MCpl » Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:12 am

How about lowering next to a route and checking out all the holds before trying to climb the route for the first time? Still onsight I guess.

But after reading all the post one can see the discrepencies in the accepted and defined definitions of onsight. Wikkipedia's definition:
On-sight
A clean ascent, with no prior practice or beta.

Yet we find the climbing community accepting downclimbing and reclimbing a route as onsight if the climber climbed the crux for the first time clean as ok. Sub-aside to that, there are some onsights that are easier because the draws are pre-placed, holds are chalked/ticked, etc. Still an onsight albeit soft. Perhaps to satisfy record keepers, there ought to be an option to tag the onsight as soft because of the afore mentioned aids.

The question now being which comunity do you want to be part of? People who care about what other climbers are doing (media, 8a.nu, stick-clipping first bolt, etc) or climbing for yourself?

meingh
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1284
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2004 12:18 pm

Post by meingh » Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:32 am

Onsite has nothing at all to do with pre-placed gear in that definition which Gary wrote
WRONG!!!!!

My definition: "Climbing the route from the ground up, first time, with no assistance, without falling, until you reach the top."

I would classify preplaced draws a s assistance, would you not. If not then sit down and think about it for a while. If I have to place draws and you don't then you got some help, we call that assistance.

I'm kind of spent so I will some it all up for you.

We agree that onsiting is climbing without assistance first try. The reason why your original comments are wrong is because you want a clear, usable by everyone, dictionary definition that can be used for record keeping purposes. NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.

Climbing without assistance means no help, even knowing the grade of a route can be classified as assistance not to mention the hundreds of other points already pointed out.

SO.......

A clear definition "for the purposes of keeping a record of what was done" must not allow for and subjectivity to ensure consistent accurate evaluations.

Assistance by definition will include anything that will help you send the route.

Everyone has a different idea or belief on where to draw the line for what is classified as Assistance.

Therefore the definition on Onsite is subjective and subsequently not a definition that meets your requirements.

BOTTOM line you can;t write a definition that is not subjective that everyone will agree with. Case Closed.

As an added point in the example of the onsite scenario's above you said:


We both agree an onsight is made on the "first try". The second climber tried the route, went up and then downclimbed to the ground. He made two tries on the route. He send it on his third try yes? Who would call that onsight? Certainly not me, and probably not you, and probably nobody who agrees with the definition of onsight we used:
Using the logic yo mentioned above, I can easily disprove every single onsite you have ever done with some technicality with in the description.

This is my last post o this topic because it's too much typing and repeating my self. My comments are above, its pretty clear what I am trying to say. If you want to continue this come up with a definition that is not subjective that works like the rules of chess. GOOD LUCK :)

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests