Page 3 of 5

PostPosted: Fri Jan 15, 2010 11:29 pm
by Andinistaloco
fatdad wrote:[quote="ksolem]That is even more incredible. There must be more to this story…


I was kind of wondering that too but it reminded me of an incident when a party tried to pass me by jugging our fixed ropes (so we couldn't unclip them) and then getting really angry when we didn't let them pass since they were idiots. The leader of the two--some German dude--was totally aggro about it. He was at the belay doing his best Hulk imitations--groaning, flexing and waving his arms, veins bulging--except he was totally serious. I thought his head was going explode. After a while, he issued a curse about our likelihood of succeeding on the climb and rapped off.

They're some crazy people out there.[/quote]

Holy hell, and I thought I'd seen it all. But never seen anything like that....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 2:24 am
by Sierra Ledge Rat
Okay, I can see your point if there are a limited number of climbs in a small area. The pool hall does apply in that case.

Now if there are a lot of climbs in the area -- who cares if the top ropers don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting up the 5.13? They got there first.

Unless, of course, you mean the TR is in place and there's no one around. Shit, pull the rope aside, tie it off, and have at the route.

The Tuolomne story is true, no shit. They even left a note on the windshield of my car. The note said that we should have lowered off and let them climb ahead of us since they were "obviously" much faster climbers than we were. Damn, Tuolomne was totally empty. If they wanted first dibs on the regular route, they should have gotten out of bed earlier.

PostPosted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 6:38 pm
by Andinistaloco
Sierra Ledge Rat wrote:The Tuolomne story is true, no shit. They even left a note on the windshield of my car. The note said that we should have lowered off and let them climb ahead of us since they were "obviously" much faster climbers than we were. Damn, Tuolomne was totally empty. If they wanted first dibs on the regular route, they should have gotten out of bed earlier.


Hope you saved it. Sounds absolutely classic, especially if they used the word "obviously." Bit funny, bit sad....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 16, 2010 9:48 pm
by ShortTimer
While I think it is stupid for people to french free their way up routes way over their head, I also think that if someone got there first, the route is theirs until they are done. I don't care how 'phyched' you are to lead something, wait your damn turn.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:46 pm
by Guyzo
ShortTimer wrote:While I think it is stupid for people to french free their way up routes way over their head, I also think that if someone got there first, the route is theirs until they are done. I don't care how 'phyched' you are to lead something, wait your damn turn.


Jan, No problem waiting for others to finish up .... That is exactly what I was doing and that is when this question popped into my little brain. :?:

Maybe I could have phrased my question differently, who knows.

Maybe something like this: "so is it me, or do some of you noticed the "new" style of climbing, employed by some, is not really climbing, rather people hauling? :wink:

Oh ya how was Texas? You send anything of note?????? Or did the boss keep your nose to the grind stone???



:wink:

PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 8:54 pm
by rhyang
I remember climbing something at Lovers Leap, near Tahoe, again following a more-experienced friend .. must have been a while ago, can't remember exactly what. Anyway, there was a group of euro's (french ? it really isn't important though) who were really impatient. I think we may have been on Bear's Reach, now that I think about it.. they must have passed us on Bushy Ledge.

They got on Fantasia and tried to pass another party, going so far as to clip into the other party's anchor. Really rude. Just amazing.

PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 9:44 pm
by Guyzo
rhyang wrote:I remember climbing something at Lovers Leap, near Tahoe, again following a more-experienced friend .. must have been a while ago, can't remember exactly what. Anyway, there was a group of euro's (french ? it really isn't important though) who were really impatient. I think we may have been on Bear's Reach, now that I think about it.. they must have passed us on Bushy Ledge.

They got on Fantasia and tried to pass another party, going so far as to clip into the other party's anchor. Really rude. Just amazing.


Rob, I was on a climb in RR where two climbs crossed. The routes crossed at a bolted anchor (3 bolts )....... the scum who was sitting on the anchors when I arrived, refused to allow me to clip in!!!!!!!!!

At first I was totally bewildered :? I asked again and was told that it would be to dangerous :shock: .

So I stood on the small foot holds below for about 15 minutes, thinking about Warren Harding and his visions of "A wild piton hammer fight" ........ :x :wink:

He, finally cleaned up and climbed on and I took over position at the bolts..... still wondering at this lapse in standard courtesy. :roll:

Later that day while rapping I ran into these very same folks. Their cord had become "stuck" at the last rap.......

I rapped right down past their stuck cord...... so did my partner. I hope it's still fixed. :wink:

Courtesy is a two way street. :wink:

PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 10:20 pm
by Andinistaloco
Guyzo wrote:
rhyang wrote:I remember climbing something at Lovers Leap, near Tahoe, again following a more-experienced friend .. must have been a while ago, can't remember exactly what. Anyway, there was a group of euro's (french ? it really isn't important though) who were really impatient. I think we may have been on Bear's Reach, now that I think about it.. they must have passed us on Bushy Ledge.

They got on Fantasia and tried to pass another party, going so far as to clip into the other party's anchor. Really rude. Just amazing.


Rob, I was on a climb in RR where two climbs crossed. The routes crossed at a bolted anchor (3 bolts )....... the scum who was sitting on the anchors when I arrived, refused to allow me to clip in!!!!!!!!!

At first I was totally bewildered :? I asked again and was told that it would be to dangerous :shock: .

So I stood on the small foot holds below for about 15 minutes, thinking about Warren Harding and his visions of "A wild piton hammer fight" ........ :x :wink:

He, finally cleaned up and climbed on and I took over position at the bolts..... still wondering at this lapse in standard courtesy. :roll:

Later that day while rapping I ran into these very same folks. Their cord had become "stuck" at the last rap.......

I rapped right down past their stuck cord...... so did my partner. I hope it's still fixed. :wink:

Courtesy is a two way street. :wink:


Hell, that crosses discourtesy and almost become malicious... what a punk.

Didn't give a little tug on the cord, did you? :wink:

PostPosted: Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:06 pm
by fatdad
ShortTimer wrote:While I think it is stupid for people to french free their way up routes way over their head, I also think that if someone got there first, the route is theirs until they are done. I don't care how 'phyched' you are to lead something, wait your damn turn.


Your point is nice in that it establishes a nice bright line rule about when a route is available, but the underlying issue presented in the OP was whether the people on the route had any business being there.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 7:13 am
by Sierra Ledge Rat
fatdad wrote:Your point is nice in that it establishes a nice bright line rule about when a route is available, but the underlying issue presented in the OP was whether the people on the route had any business being there.


And who exactly makes the determination as to whether or not someone has any business of being on any route?

I thought that decision was always made by the person who is doing the climbing.

In my experience, when someone says that so-and-so has no business being on a route, it means that they slept in too late and got to a route after everyone else.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 5:20 pm
by Guyzo
Sierra Ledge Rat wrote:
fatdad wrote:Your point is nice in that it establishes a nice bright line rule about when a route is available, but the underlying issue presented in the OP was whether the people on the route had any business being there.


And who exactly makes the determination as to whether or not someone has any business of being on any route?

I thought that decision was always made by the person who is doing the climbing.

In my experience, when someone says that so-and-so has no business being on a route, it means that they slept in too late and got to a route after everyone else.


The early bird gets the worm. :wink:

PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 6:46 pm
by fatdad
Guyzo wrote:
Sierra Ledge Rat wrote:
fatdad wrote:Your point is nice in that it establishes a nice bright line rule about when a route is available, but the underlying issue presented in the OP was whether the people on the route had any business being there.


And who exactly makes the determination as to whether or not someone has any business of being on any route?

I thought that decision was always made by the person who is doing the climbing.

In my experience, when someone says that so-and-so has no business being on a route, it means that they slept in too late and got to a route after everyone else.


The early bird gets the worm. :wink:


Doesn't that undercut the entire premise of your OP?

Technically, you're right. If you're there first, it's yours. But the OP raised an ethics issue, not a timing one. By that rationale, the "5.11" gym climber is well within his rights to monopolize Hot Rocks at Josh, even though he can only one or two move off the ground, never mind the crux being some 25 or 30 ft. up. So, OK, he got there first. Tough. But wasn't the premise of the OP a different question: should s/he even be there?

I'm not talking about shooting off at the mouth and badgering the person to leave. You kind of have to hope that the person is smart enough to figure it out eventually. But come on, in the confines of this discussion, should that person be on that route when they're just polishing the opening moves? You guys are completely punting on that.

PostPosted: Thu Jan 21, 2010 9:59 pm
by ksolem
I'll go for the first down.

I think it is really bad style to set up a top rope and “work” a route which you are not ready for. This practice reveals a total lack of understanding about how to get better at climbing. One needs to progress incrementally with well understood goals. Stretch your limits? Of course. Hopelessly flail? Makes you worse.

A big part of the art of climbing is to choose your routes wisely.

I don’t think the OP or any other reasonable person would be bothered by the early bird who got there first if they are progressing reasonably on the climb and not abusing it. I for one would be offering encouragement.

Also I am surprised that the point I have raised earlier on this thread: that flailing climbers damage the route, has got no traction in this discussion. This flailing bs is a real issue in Joshua Tree.

PostPosted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 5:34 pm
by ShortTimer
Of course the other issue with tr'ing a climb to death is that generally the wrong holds are getting chalked up and when someone goes to lead it they are misdirected and that might lead them to fall off...

PostPosted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 11:09 pm
by Sierra Ledge Rat
ksolem wrote:I think it is really bad style to set up a top rope and “work” a route which you are not ready for. This practice reveals a total lack of understanding about how to get better at climbing. One needs to progress incrementally with well understood goals. Stretch your limits? Of course. Hopelessly flail? Makes you worse.


Not necessarily.

We used to regularly set up a top rope on an "impossible" 5.10 in Yosemite on our rest days, and drink beer and thrash.

A year later I was leading the route and placing only one stopper on the entire pitch.