Dingus Milktoast wrote:butitsadryheat wrote:He moved there to retire. I also happen to know that one place The Chief dreams of climbing is in Syria. He isn't reserved to the Sierra(s).
What color is his underwear?
DMT
True climbers don't wear any!
by Bruno » Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:14 am
Dingus Milktoast wrote:butitsadryheat wrote:He moved there to retire. I also happen to know that one place The Chief dreams of climbing is in Syria. He isn't reserved to the Sierra(s).
What color is his underwear?
DMT
by Bruno » Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:28 am
The Chief wrote:Bruno_Tibet wrote:From the little I know about the 96 tragedy, Boukreev is probably the main hero, and not the villain as depicted in Krakauer's book.
But Boukreev is precisely the kind of "guide" you have been bashing over the last 15 pages, I mean he saw his own role as "the one to be here in case" rather than a "guide" in a strict sense. At least not the one to remain 24/7 within 10-15 feet of his clients as you are advocating.
Don't forget that Boukreev reached the summit ahead of all his teammates, started his descent while some other clients were still ascending, and reached C4 ahead of everybody, leaving ALL other clients behind. A criminal attitude in your eyes. But then Boukreev was present to successfully rescue and save the life of several climbers when the need arose. Once nothing more could be done, he did not let himself die on the mountain next to his dead companions. He went down, and faced the critics of people like you.
I, for my side, don't criticise him. I rather honour his memory.
Have a good climb,
Bruno
PS. Another acronym question: what does actually FA mean, to which you always refer? Follow my Advice?
Dude.. this post is one bigass contradiction.
First you say I bashed Boukreev and then you claim he is the epitome of what I claim as what a guide should be.
I never bashed nor criticize Boukreev, not once. I applaud him as an example for the rest to follow. He put his ass on the line several times in the shitiest of conditions to save others. Exactly what all guides that have taken on the responsibility, should do without hesitation. Period!
First Ascent
I started playing this game back in '68 Vitalitym.
The Chief wrote:First you say I bashed Boukreev and then you claim he is the epitome of what I claim as what a guide should be.
The Chief wrote:I never bashed nor criticize Boukreev, not once. I applaud him as an example for the rest to follow.
by Buz Groshong » Thu Jun 10, 2010 2:39 pm
Gary Schenk wrote:The Chief wrote:You forgot one major player in all this. Had it not been for Boukreev ascending numerous times into the shit of shit...
And catching shit from Krakauer...
by The Chief » Thu Jun 10, 2010 2:43 pm
Vitaliy M wrote:I might be wrong. BUT my interpretation of what Chief was trying to say is that he does not like the same thing Boukreev didn't understand when he got to Everest that year. He (Boukreev) thought he will be helping to lead a group of already established climbers with a bit less experience than him, but instead he got CLIENTS that for most part did not belong on the mountain. In his culture there were no guided trips with clients like that, there were people that liked climbing all mountains, not for simple reason that it is the highest one and they need to get to the top even though they will put everyone else on the expedition under some big risks. He simply did not understand these people. So I guess Chief likes to lead his trips for people that can carry their load and actually complete their climb to get the summit, not baby someone on Everest who puts on her crampons backwards. And maybe in his opinion people like that (clients that do not belong on the mountain) 1) shouldn't climb it 2)if are climbing it, have guides that will teach them most of the skills needed, and stay close on the ascent/descent in order to make sure junior doesn't freak out...
by Brad Marshall » Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:12 pm
The Chief wrote:Vitaliy M wrote:I might be wrong. BUT my interpretation of what Chief was trying to say is that he does not like the same thing Boukreev didn't understand when he got to Everest that year. He (Boukreev) thought he will be helping to lead a group of already established climbers with a bit less experience than him, but instead he got CLIENTS that for most part did not belong on the mountain. In his culture there were no guided trips with clients like that, there were people that liked climbing all mountains, not for simple reason that it is the highest one and they need to get to the top even though they will put everyone else on the expedition under some big risks. He simply did not understand these people. So I guess Chief likes to lead his trips for people that can carry their load and actually complete their climb to get the summit, not baby someone on Everest who puts on her crampons backwards. And maybe in his opinion people like that (clients that do not belong on the mountain) 1) shouldn't climb it 2)if are climbing it, have guides that will teach them most of the skills needed, and stay close on the ascent/descent in order to make sure junior doesn't freak out...
Hallelujah... there is a God after all! AMEN.
by kevin trieu » Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:53 pm
Damien Gildea wrote:Reading your posts in this thread Rick is like watching the drunk, drugf#%ked driver in one of those police-chase videos, careening from mishap to mishap, running off the road, going the wrong way down streets, hitting people, screaming incohrent abuse at strangers, and driving on - but ultimately just one long, slow, car crash ...
by outofstep80 » Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:03 pm
by Buz Groshong » Thu Jun 10, 2010 9:40 pm
FortMental wrote:Hell, for a hundred grand, I'll guide your grandma up any peak she wants. I'll even do her on the summit.
by Bruno » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:32 pm
The Chief wrote:cuz you spend far too much time perceiving and evaluating things.
by Bruno » Fri Jun 11, 2010 7:39 pm
Bruno_Tibet wrote:The Chief wrote:Bruno_Tibet wrote:From the little I know about the 96 tragedy, Boukreev is probably the main hero, and not the villain as depicted in Krakauer's book.
But Boukreev is precisely the kind of "guide" you have been bashing over the last 15 pages, I mean he saw his own role as "the one to be here in case" rather than a "guide" in a strict sense. At least not the one to remain 24/7 within 10-15 feet of his clients as you are advocating.
Don't forget that Boukreev reached the summit ahead of all his teammates, started his descent while some other clients were still ascending, and reached C4 ahead of everybody, leaving ALL other clients behind. A criminal attitude in your eyes. But then Boukreev was present to successfully rescue and save the life of several climbers when the need arose. Once nothing more could be done, he did not let himself die on the mountain next to his dead companions. He went down, and faced the critics of people like you.
I, for my side, don't criticise him. I rather honour his memory.
Have a good climb,
Bruno
PS. Another acronym question: what does actually FA mean, to which you always refer? Follow my Advice?
Dude.. this post is one bigass contradiction.
First you say I bashed Boukreev and then you claim he is the epitome of what I claim as what a guide should be.
I never bashed nor criticize Boukreev, not once. I applaud him as an example for the rest to follow. He put his ass on the line several times in the shitiest of conditions to save others. Exactly what all guides that have taken on the responsibility, should do without hesitation. Period!
First Ascent
I started playing this game back in '68 Vitalitym.
Jefe!
I sometimes wonder whether you just pretend not to understand (like me kidding you with my slightly sarcastic comment about Follow my Advice instead of First Ascent), or whether you really do not understand.The Chief wrote:First you say I bashed Boukreev and then you claim he is the epitome of what I claim as what a guide should be.
I did not say you bashed Boukreev. I said you bashed the type of "guide" he represented.
Trying to summarise: over the last 15 pages you basically said that a good guide must fulfil the following two criteria:
1) NEVER ABANDON a fellow climber needing rescue, whatever the conditions are.
2) STAY ALWAYS with his/her client(s), 24/7 and within maximum 10-15 feet (not sure how you do on rocky sections or steep ice, 10-15 feet is a bit short for a pitch…)
About Nr. 1, everybody agrees on this thread that a good guide (and by extension every mountaineer) should do his/her outmost possible to save fellow climbers. The only disagreement between SP members is at which point you are morally allowed to abort the rescue: before you are dead yourself, or after you are dead; I did not express myself on this point.
About Nr. 2, you seem to be the only one advocating this baby-sitting style to be the only acceptable guiding standard on high Himalayan mountains.
Now back to Boukreev: while both of us will agree that he perfectly fulfil the first criteria, you should accept the fact Boukreev represents exactly the opposed guiding style you have advocated regarding criteria Nr. 2: Arriving first on summit, not waiting for fellow climbers, descending back to C4 before everybody. Fore sure, he was not within 10-15 feet of his clients during good part of the summit day. Not nice, Chief, to misuse the name of dead climbers in order to prove your points.The Chief wrote:I never bashed nor criticize Boukreev, not once. I applaud him as an example for the rest to follow.
Shall I conclude that you are now ready to applaud the guides / expedition leaders who don't necessary stay within 10-15 feet of their clients?
If this is the case, why did you start a whole scandal about "Chris" guide(s) not being there all the time?
Wish you a good FA,
Bruno
by Alpynisto » Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:27 pm
Bruno_Tibet wrote:Thanks in advance for giving a clear answer!
by Buz Groshong » Fri Jun 11, 2010 9:01 pm
Brad Marshall wrote:
OK, let's put this item to bed and move on!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests