Needs Saving?

Forgive my nOOb-ness if this question is dumb, but I just picked up the latest issue of R&I (No. 171) and on the contents page there is a blurb about competition climbing/bouldering.

It says: "Reviled and dissed by trad climbers and old schoolers, competition climbing may be our sport's purest form - and the very thing that saves it."

So I got to wondering, what does climbing need saving from, and how is it that competition climbing/bouldering will do that? I didn't get much out of the article. Is climbing in trouble?!

It's in trouble of being taken over by a generation of climbers who don't care about how things have evolved and the great history of climbing. Just my two cents.

I thought that was the stupidest statement that I have ever read in a climbing magazine. Does anyone read this stuff before they publish it?

IMO, I think climbing needs saving from the very thing that the article portrays to be "saving" climbing: blind popularity.

Climbing doesn't need saving.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoy taking new people out climbing and teaching them how to respect the rock and I understand that climbing evolves. But if people aren't going to respect the rock, the art of climbing, and its history, then I would rather not bother in teaching new people. Yeah, things change, but you still have to have respect for tradition and history.

I respect everyone's reason for climbing, but I do not think climbing needs to be "saved" by popularity.

....and breathe....

I haven't read the article, but seeing what you wrote about it, jfox, got me worked up.

I think R&I is just saying that climbing's score in the national athletic scene popularity contest needs saving. Comps are rigid and regulated for the purpose of judgment. Like a highly controlled scientific experiment. Easy to judge, easy to pick winners, easy to publicize. What a horrible world it would be if fewer people knew about and promoted this climbing thing. ;) I don't even want to call it a sport. It is just life for most of us, right?

metrozen wrote:I don't even want to call it a sport. It is just life for most of us, right?

Me neither. I tend to call it an 'activity' rather than a sport. Whatever. The article was written by a guy that owns/operates/promotes these climbing comps and it came off like he is just trying to sell his 'product'.

I've never been to a comp, so I can't comment on that, but I'm wondering: The author of the article stated that comps are good for fostering ethics and respect for climbing that upstarts may not get on their own. Is the Access Fund present at these events?

Good topic for a new thread....is there anything more boring to watch than a climbing comp?

JF

mattb19 wrote:It's in trouble of being taken over by a generation of climbers who don't care about how things have evolved and the great history of climbing. Just my two cents.

I agree, as part of the generation that grew up climbing outside (only moving inside for training) The new generation of climbers who are coming outside from gyms were never taught the principles and ethics that have been handed down throughout climbing history...The shared knowledge of climbers, that has been passed down from teacher to apprentice while learning how to climb traditionally. Now climbers need only pass a test(s), buy some draws and a rope. But besides that, R&I has become pulp - a former shadow of a once great publication. If you still buy it, stop - save your pennies for alpinist.

j fassett wrote:Good topic for a new thread....is there anything more boring to watch than a climbing comp? JF

Reading about it in R & I.

doug s wrote: I agree, as part of the generation that grew up climbing outside (only moving inside for training) The new generation of climbers who are coming outside from gyms were never taught the principles and ethics that have been handed down throughout climbing history...The shared knowledge of climbers, that has been passed down from teacher to apprentice while learning how to climb traditionally. Now climbers need only pass a test(s), buy some draws and a rope. But besides that, R&I has become pulp - a former shadow of a once great publication. If you still buy it, stop - save your pennies for alpinist.

Unfortunately, I am one of this new generation. I began climbing in a gym, never made it into the "in" crowd, and just bought a bunch of gear, then went out and taught myself. My small group of partners and I were totally lost on real rock, and soon I found myself partnerless. Almost 7 years later, I consider myself to be more of a "crusty oldschooler" than one of the new breed, and I think climbings "salvation" comes in the form of eliminating the sport aspect, and highlighting the lifestyle. If asked to define yourself in 5 words or less, how many of us would have climber as one of the words? How many sports can say that?

Ryan Tuleja wrote: Unfortunately, I am one of this new generation. I began climbing in a gym, never made it into the "in" crowd, and just bought a bunch of gear, then went out and taught myself. My small group of partners and I were totally lost on real rock, and soon I found myself partnerless. Almost 7 years later, I consider myself to be more of a "crusty oldschooler" than one of the new breed, and I think climbings "salvation" comes in the form of eliminating the sport aspect, and highlighting the lifestyle. If asked to define yourself in 5 words or less, how many of us would have climber as one of the words? How many sports can say that?

Ryan - sorry to make broad generalizations - there are exceptions to every situation...my point was that gyms broke the chain of handed down experiences and ethics - not that people who started climbing in gyms are all ignorant to the history and ethics of climbing's past. And yes - I would use climber as one of my five words...

Ryan Tuleja wrote: Almost 7 years later, I consider myself to be more of a "crusty oldschooler" than one of the new breed,

Yeaaaaa CRUSTY OLDSCHOOLERS!!!!!!!!

A few thoughts, on only one cup of coffee:
1. It doesn't need saving.
2. It would even be NICE if competition climbers spent more time indoors and away from the crags. The outdoor climbing would be much more pleasant with fewer people.
3. I did the comps in the late 80's and realized they would never be popular to watch when even I could not sit and watch my friends after I was done. Its way too boring to be entertainment like BBall and Football.
4. Rock and Ice got exactly what they wanted from that line... we are talking about Roack and Ice.
5. Dogs are better pets than cats.

I'm not sure I'd lump the Alpinist in with RI and Climbing. I think the basic format of RI and Climbing is tired. I use to have subscriptions to both but have since let them laspse. The latest news on who is climbing 5.27 and beyond doesn't appeal to me. Its not my preference. However I do enjoy the Alpinist, because it is more of a mountaineering mag. Also, I really enjoy the history aspect too. I came into climbing later in my life and I'm drawn to the longer multi-pitch trad routes. I'd much prefer to do a 500ft+ 5.7/5.8 multi-pitch climb over a 90ft 5.12 (admittingly I couldn't climb 5.12). But what I think needs to be saved in climbing is having everyone learn to respect the land (climbing areas). Because disrepect from climbers is what can/will hurt us.

Some reasons not to even bother picking up those magazines:

1) Alpinist used to be cool: till they did a 5 page spread on BUILDERING! WTF?!!? How does that in any way relate to alpinism!?

2) R&I putting an 11 year old on the cover ready to smash his face in as he goes for a ridiculous (albeit "creative") clip. Whats next, pictures a la Vertical Limit crevasse jumping and adverts for Cliffhanger's Bolt Gun?

3) Both R&I and Climbing spending more sq inches of their magazines advertising crap that'll make you look like a climber or hard core outdoor enthusiast.

Save your money you would have spent on these rags and buy a few new cams.

Climbing doesn't need saving. And if it did, it would not be saved by the likes of plastic-pulling teeny-bopper gym rats racing for time to the top of a 5.6 or being "scored" on how many clips they can make on a 5.hard climb!!

The problem - as I see it - is that climbers used to climb, but now they are more excited over arguing the merits of the magazines they're reading. The answer - as my good climbing partner would say - is to give everyone guns and let the differences be sorted out appropriately.

doug s wrote: Ryan - sorry to make broad generalizations - there are exceptions to every situation...my point was that gyms broke the chain of handed down experiences and ethics - not that people who started climbing in gyms are all ignorant to the history and ethics of climbing's past. And yes - I would use climber as one of my five words...

Doug, Actually, I was agreeing with you. I ran out of partners because the outside rock had a learning curve that, for one reason or another, sent all of my crowd on to other interests. I started learning the history and found that it dramatically enriched my climbing experiences. Having skipped the apprenticeship stage, I think I am still learning at a slower rate than most, but I think I might enjoy my progression more also!

2) R&I putting an 11 year old on the cover ready to smash his face in as he goes for a ridiculous (albeit "creative") clip. Whats next, pictures a la Vertical Limit crevasse jumping and adverts for Cliffhanger's Bolt Gun?

Yeah, saw that on the cover and thought WTF?

Paz Ramirez wrote:You're supporting that whole system of that 'sport' when you buy these magazines, all 3 of them (R&I, Climbing, Alpinist).

Chad Kline wrote:I'm not sure I'd lump the Alpinist in with RI and Climbing. I think the basic format of RI and Climbing is tired.

I agree with Chad on this one. Alpinist focuses on the history of mountaineering, and their articles seem to me to be much more focused on the experience of climbing rather than the tired old ticklist. Climbing and R&I are way too much about the scene and the numbers, but Alpinist is more about the things that make climbing great and a worthy lifelong pursuit. I'm always stoked to get out after reading Alpinist; rarely, if ever, after reading the other rags.

Yup. Even as a non alpine climber (uh, Southern Arizona alpine?), I am much more inspired by the stories and photos in Alpinist than any other rag. Stories and photos of things that I will never do, but still encourage me to pursue the lower altitude crag bagging lifestyle that I love. My buddies and I share the mag and handle it like comic book geeks with Radioactive Man #1. We talk about the individuals and their exploits. I personally like the bio page. I also can't recall being distracted by any ads Alpinist. Maybe because they're mostly those super minimalist arcteryx ads or something. The other mags... I still look at them, but only the chalk covered back issues at the gym when I am fragged out.