Are sport climbs of a more moderate grade desirable?

Check out northern New Mexico, Mallette Canyon and Roadside Distraction.

When I first started climbing a lot outdoors, I did so with a group of sport climbers who warmed up on 10s and 11s and then worked 11s and 12s for the day. I ended up doing little but TRing 10s and 11s most of the time that were too hard for me and getting little lead experience (duh).

Eventually the group broke apart to some degree and I started to dislike the social aspect of the remaining company I continued to climb with (not to mention I wanted to learn how to crack climb), so I found new partners. The group was composed of a mix of experienced climbers and newer climbers. This gave me a chance to climb a lot more moderates as well as put up a lot of the routes since some of the other climbers needed me to. The fact of the matter was that this secondary climbing experience gave me far more in terms of physical technique and mental training than I ever got with the first group and I feel I became a much better climber in the long run as I approached leading and following higher grades.

Entry level climbers need entry level routes to learn technique and train their lead heads on. (This doesn't mean they have to be overbolted, however.) Yes, I do think most route setters look for lines they themselves wish to climb, rather than with a mind for the community as a whole. I guess this is their prerogative, but I just want to say that I think bolting more quality moderates is a great idea (anywhere!).

P.S. I'm not sure I understand the post from the individual who feels his moderate routes were "dumbing down" the sport. Unless they were crap lines with bad bolting, I definitely disagree. This sounds like the classic case of the "expert" unable to see eye level again with the novice.

P.P.S. Quality moderates CAN be had--where I live, I think most of the lines at Arizona's Ridgeline area on Mt Lemmon are all quite good, not to mention there are a few nice moderates in Arizona's Jack's Canyon and some in various areas of Queen Creek.

The focus should be less on the grade and more on the quality of the line. Don't put in 5.4's or 5.6's or 5.9's or 5.12's just for the sake of having bolted climbs at those grades. If it's a quality line (that lacks natural gear, of course), put in a few bolts. But to bolt easier lines just to placate the masses... That just doesn't make sense to me.

Oh, and having a 2000 ft. fully bolted 5.4 seems kind of silly. I thought the question was about bolting climbs basically for beginners. I wouldn't consider a 2000 ft. 5.4 a beginner's climb even if it was bolted. Just look at the standard east face route on the 3rd Flatiron. It's bolted... ;-)

sounds like a route you might be able to redpoint killis

I am a beginner with a couple of kids who are interested in climbing too and I have been dreaming of a small sport crag with real easy and bolted routes. I definitely get more satisfaction leading than TR'ing.

I am probably taking it to the extreme though because I would like a place with like 5.0 to 5.5 and maybe 50 Ft or so high max. It seems that new leaders would benefit because they don't have to worry about the placement of pro as in an ez trad route and you get a chance to start acquiring lead skills as you are coming up from the low grades. Then you could make the jump to trad.

I am on the lookout for a place to develop like this in either the Phoenix area or Tucson that won't bring a rash of "noobs" into a popular area. Maybe someday.

JmH wrote:I am a beginner with a couple of kids who are interested in climbing too and I have been dreaming of a small sport crag with real easy and bolted routes.

A year later, I still have reservations about sport climbs that are too easy specifically due to the fact that inexperienced climbers will have to eventually perform the untie/set up rap or lower/re-tie manuever.

That said, this time a year from now the Denver area will have a new batch of killer, long moderate sport and trad routes.

Because I am not interested in doing the research, someone remind me of the drilling/bolt placing laws at Red Rocks these days.

It is probably still a mess. While there is wonderful potential at RR for the type of climbing you are describing, I don't think it's going to happen.

Forest Starr wrote:Bolting is legal along Calico 1 & 2 but should be done only after consulting the climbing staff, a local climbing shop, or the Las Vegas Climber's Liason Council."

Please stop calling climbing "safe"!!!

There are lots of routes like the ones you seek just buy some traditional gear and go climb them. Most climbs in that range have lots of features and don't warrant bolts. These are really basic climbing philosophy's

I agree with Richard. The quality of the line is more important than the grade.

Also anyone that needs a line of bolts on a 5.4 should not be 1500 ft. off the deck in the first place. Your just asking for trouble. The rescue on Sheepshead in Cochise Stronghold this weekend bears this out.
This was on a 5.10a not a 5.4!

There's nothing wrong with paying your dues before you tackle the big stuff.

All us old duffers had to do it, why the need to skip from gym to long routes with none of the requisite training and experience.

When I first started climbing sport climbing started at 5.10 and even those were really considered warm ups for the "real" sport climbs.
I have a hard time thinking of anything less as sport climbing.

For the sake of argument, aren't you guys just being elitest?

I don't like multi pitch climbs with bolts every 5 feet either, buy who am I to say that they shouldn't exist?

For the sake of argument (elitists) ... I'll take you up on that.

I'm freaking ancient, decently in aerobic condition, but way out of strength-to-weight ratio condition, spent a great deal of my early years in landscaping and construction jobs that resulted in my breaking almost every bone in both hands and one wrist at one time or another over a 20 year period, including chip fractures with separated ligaments and tendons. In fact, the last doctor who viewed my xrays said "did you get your hand stuck in a lawn mower or what?". I honestly said "yes".

I took up climbing late in life, and over the course of a year realized I may never ever do anything over a 5.10a. Ever. .... Ever ....

That pretty much limits me to the dozen or so under-5.10 routes at the local gym, like 2 routes in AF canyon, and dozens of trad lines.

I would totally love the convenience of clipping bolts the whole way up, and while 5.4 might be okay if it were a pretty view or something, a ten-pitch 5.7 sport route would be totally rad --- to me.

Normally when I mention my various injuries, weaknesses, and willingness to forever climb < 5.12 routes to climbers they suggest I take up golf or some other non-sport, since there is no future in climbing at that level.

So there is some element of elitism in an answer like that. Very non-supportive. Very "join my secret 5.12 club or you can just go somewhere else". I've never gotten any other answer from any climber I've talked to.

No support of me as an individual or my accessibility requirements:

"Dude, you redpointed that 5.9 in only a day!"
"Hey, you wanna put in a new 3-pitch 5.7? That's a decent line, and Lowes has a sale on bolts."

Anyway, you get the idea.

Not trying to slam anyone, and I would normally not bother with posting to the board, but this thread has been so interesting, and I hate golf.

Great example Rick.

I assume that you know about all of the easy bolted multi pitch lines at the City of Rocks?

I think that the term "Sport Climb" is supposed to define a climb that has no real danger from a fall allowable; except getting to the first bolt. Possible fall distance is mostly held to a minimum, while overall fall potential increases. Therein lies the difference between "Sport Climbs" and "bolted routes". Any climb less than 5.8 will probably be bolted as a bolted route not a Sport Climb because most climbers (even newbies) don't fall on moves easier than that. With the above standard, such as in Red Rock Canyon, Colo. Spgs. I think more moderates are always a welcome thing! Afterall, not only are some of us getting old but high end sport climbs sometimes seem to hang out in mid-air with nobody ever on them. I've never seen anyone on Solar Panel (12c) ? at North Table, but that is just one example. The 5.8's are always busy!!

Jim,
Yes, you have hit my original point on the very head.
I've always noticed that the most moderate (lowest rated route) sport line at every area I've been to has a queue of people standing in line to do it.
Historically, I, and most of the folks I know with a drill, have bolted lines that are challenges for us at the time, and these are usually at the higher grades.
Most climbers who are into the sport enough to invest the hundreds of dollars and hours of work necessary to equip a sport route, are climbing at a higher grade, so subsequently, the sport climbs they equip tend to be in the higher grades.
There has been a lot of feedback on this post where people think that sport routes of a lower grade of difficulty are not needed.
I think that this may be an elitist reaction, rather than fact, as the popularity of "warmup" routes indicate.

Nick Wilder wrote:I'm going to print a batch of Mountain Project tshirts on good-quality Dry Mesh shirts (the picture shows grey, but ours will be white). The prints will look like this: Front of Shirt Back of Shirt To get your free shirt: Reply here, in this forum, and tell me your mailing address and size. Someday soon we'll be selling regular cotton tshirts to our general users, but admins get something better... Here's a preview of the MP tshirt store.

There are some good points here, but essentially it's not the climbers that will decide who has/hasn't is/isn't worthy of climbing certain grades -- it will be up to the land mgr/owner as to the impact they want on their land.

If you go with only high/expert grades, you will weed out potential access & conservation participants; though if you go with also moderate grades you will increase impact. Also to consider, if you don't go with putting fixed pro routes in, quality routes that are still moderate grades could very well still be impacted from popularity & participants will use other means of protection & anchoring, along with social trailing if the option of fixed protection is not available.

The solution is gonna be what is the best balance for a given area, which will ultimately be a decision for the land mgr/owner based on more than climber-only input. I think a balance of fixed protection serves a given area by reducing repeated impacts away from the rock faces.