SummitPost.org

I love guidebooks...new ones, old ones, the minimalist old school ones & the shiny pretty pictured-up ones...for me a guidebook comes first & if it gets my engine going, I make (or try to make) a trip to an area. Great for daydreaming.

rpc wrote:
I love guidebooks...new ones, old ones, the minimalist old school ones & the shiny pretty pictured-up ones...for me a guidebook comes first & if it gets my engine going, I make (or try to make) a trip to an area. Great for daydreaming.

Awesome pic! That's because you live in the PNW, Radek...lots of enforced time for day-dreaming

Using a detailed guide book diminishes the climb no more than climbing a bolted route. Is sport climbing really climbing, or is using a rope even true climbing? If you are too much of a "purist" to use a detailed route description, leave the rope at home too.

mvs wrote:

rpc wrote:
I love guidebooks...new ones, old ones, the minimalist old school ones & the shiny pretty pictured-up ones...for me a guidebook comes first & if it gets my engine going, I make (or try to make) a trip to an area. Great for daydreaming.

Awesome pic! That's because you live in the PNW, Radek...lots of enforced time for day-dreaming

thanks Michael & you're right about the extra rain time to daydream here....while sipping either fine coffee or even finer microbrews

Regarding Guyzo's post above...

The equation is simple: the more specific beta one includes in a guidebook, the more mistakes there will be. One persons "orange alien here" is anothers pair of stoppers 10 inches below leaving the cam placement open for the fingers...

I much prefer doing things my own way over relying on a detailed topo full of beta.

I also think that a well organized and well thought out guidebook can really enhance one's experience climbing. To know who did what and when... To be able to know what and where the established climbs are... These things don't take away from one's adventure but rather facilitate it. We do, as climbers, walk in the footsteps - shake hands, as Guy put it - with those who were there ahead of us.

Earlier this summer I saw a couple guys do two badass Needles routes in the same day: Romantic Warrior and Don Juan Wall. They did not have "supertopo" type beta so they were on their own in that sense, but they had info as to approaches and where the routes are, how many pitches, grades, etc.

I think they had a pretty good adventure...

Is it a guidebook if its WRONG

guidebooks = help
help = aid
therefore, guidebooks = aid
and hence, summit post = aid
It has been mathematically proven by transitive properties.

By reflexive properties, climbing = climbing, so nobody can argue against that. As A. Lowe said, "The best climber in the world is the one having the most fun." So stop trying to brag about how you choose to climb and start attacking that inferiority complex with some good old fashioned fun. If using a guidebook or hiring a guide makes it more fun to you, go for it!

Mountainjeff wrote: Is sport climbing really climbing...

The real question: Is sport climbing really sport??

howiemtnguide wrote: As A. Lowe said, "The best climber in the world is the one having the most fun."

Yeah, this one is on it's way to being one of the most over used quotes around... But no one wants to consider the fact that Alex Lowe's idea of "fun" was a bit radical.

Did Bachar convert free climbing to aid when he brought in the best shoes anyone had ever worn? I don't think so.

Is a guidebook aid? Take the old guidebook to The Needles, do Romantic Warrior, and tell me the guidebook helped.

Guide Books are way OVER RATED!

They should be used as a reference "Guide" only.

They are NOT a/the bible.

They are solely opinions of the author.

In many cases, the author climbed less that 25% of the routes within the covers. They have little actual first hand knowledge of the routes.


That is a farse and the reason I say that GB's are to be used as a ref only.

The Chief wrote:Guide Books are way OVER RATED!

They should be used as a reference "Guide" only.

They are NOT a/the bible.

They are solely opinions of the author.

In many cases, the author climbed less that 25% of the routes within the covers. They have little actual first hand knowledge of the routes.

That is a farse and the reason I say that GB's are to be used as a ref only.

Pretty broad brush, Chief. Depends on the book, seems.

Oh yeah, I totally agree with Kris's comment of "Fun".

This is my idea of fun and doing lots of it, solo. Not too many out their think my idea of fun coincides with theirs.



cp0915...

Did you climb every route that is in your GB?

The Chief wrote:cp0915...

Did you climb every route that is in your GB?

Yes. In both of them, actually.

cp0915 wrote:

The Chief wrote:cp0915...

Did you climb every route that is in your GB?

Yes. In both of them, actually.

I will vouch for that.

Chief, it's not really CP's style to put second-hand information in his books. And it's definitely not his style to lie about it. That I can guarantee; what he says is true. He climbed all those crazy peaks.

Day Hiker wrote:

cp0915 wrote:

The Chief wrote:cp0915...

Did you climb every route that is in your GB?

Yes. In both of them, actually.

I will vouch for that.

Chief, it's not really CP's style to put second-hand information in his books. And it's definitely not his style to lie about it. That I can guarantee; what he says is true. He climbed all those crazy peaks.

Thank you, sir. With a little help and companionship from people like you.

And for crying out loud, I even admit when I'm too chickenshit to finish a climb. I turned back on two attempts of The Sentinel, and told everyone about it in my Zion book.