SpiderSavage wrote:Why run-out bolts: Because the FA chose to climb that way. Perhaps because of a ground-up ethic, or a ground up necessity. Perhaps because of the price of bolts or a lack of time. Perhaps they did it for themselves, not thinking of others. There are a long list of factors too boring to list.
If you create a climb for others, you take the time craft a route that many could climb safely.
If you climb for the sake of climbing you might leave as little trace as possible.
Bolting as little as possible, as much as necesary does make sense. What does not make sense is placing bolts unsafely, regardless of absolute distances: The 2nd should always be closer to the 1st than the 1st to the ground, otherwise don´t bother placing it. If you decide to alter the rock, at least do it in a way that increases safety.
What Christian said is right on.
I don't put up climbs as public service.
I do them for the pure entertainment of climbing the unknown.
If bolts are needed, we slam them in. From stances or from hook placements, never on rap.
I feel that rap bolting, has it's place, but it's not for me or the crew I hang with and put up new climbs with.
am involved with the first accent, the placement of the bolts is a measure of my climbing ability
, it is a statement.
This is why I always like to know who
exactly, did the FA.
If "Moe klinsky" did the FA. I know I had better bring it all, because that guy can climb, and he will only slam in a bolt to keep him from death. (check out "Straight to Hell" at the Needles, 5.12R)
"Tripper Jack" on the other hand, makes climbs for the masses, he will go back and add bolts so it's "well protected for the grade". (check out NewJack City out by Barstow)
It's all climbing, some fish are just bigger and meaner.
You pick your poison. Trout or Barracuda......