Quickdraws stolen off overboard at Smith

My initial comment (hoping that culture would change such that a redpoint involved hanging draws) was stated purely because I find it a shame (aesthetically unpleasant/contrary to leave no trace ethics/potentially impacting access to crags) to see a wall covered in perma-draws.

Like I said, if the culture doesn't change, I wouldn't be surprised if more and more routes get perma-draws.

I also wouldn't be surprised if the concept of sport climbing will evolve to the point where top-roping is considered a valid redpoint.

Just so you guys know, there's somebody here that doesn't climb very hard that feels project draws are legit. I would like to think our community would embrace each other's goals and victories.

mpech wrote:I also wouldn't be surprised if the concept of sport climbing will evolve to the point where top-roping is considered a valid redpoint.

Besides the fact a lot of sport routes are a bitch to top rope/get back on when you fall, it doesn't really detract from the intent of sport climbing.

Dylan B. wrote:(1) I always thought you hung your own draws on a redpoint because it most closely replicates the FA style (assuming the climb was properly bolted on lead).

I don't see how you come any closer to the FA style of rap bolting the line by hanging your own draw.

Dylan B. wrote: You mean my TRonsight is the same as your onsight, and more impressive than your red point? Being on the sharp end is not part of the "intent" or sport climbing?

I've said no such thing. TRonsight may or may not be more impressive than a red point; that depends on the route. Clipping your own draw is more impressive, so is using a heavier rope, blown out shoes, not milking a rest for eons, etc. But those aren't the intent of sport climbing, although you are free to your own style. The actual leading aspect of sport climbing really has very little to do w/ sport climbing, even if that's still the accepted style of a sport send.

Dylan B. wrote:Yeah, that's why I said "assuming it was properly bolted on lead."

My mistake, although I thought we are talking about sport routes.

reboot wrote: I The actual leading aspect of sport climbing really has very little to do w/ sport climbing, even if that's still the accepted style of a sport send. .

Top-roping is the natural evolution of sport-climbing...

Dylan B. wrote: (assuming the climb was properly bolted on lead).

What planet do you live on? You understand we are talking about sport climbs here?

mpech wrote: Top-roping is the natural evolution of sport-climbing...

Repeatedly saying it doesn't make your argument any more compelling.

It's a lot less trouble to lead a steep route than to TR it. Especially for the person getting the rope up there.

Dylan B. wrote: I guess in your circles, that's not the case?

I said even if that's still the accepted style of a sport send. But again, not all routes are easier on TR, and many are much easier to work on lead.

Mark E Dixon wrote: It's a lot less trouble to lead a steep route than to TR it. Especially for the person getting the rope up there.

Let's not forget about it being safer as well.

Dylan B. wrote: Nobody bolts sport climbs on lead anymore?

No, especially if you are referring to bolting from a stance, that's why sport climbing was invented.

I'm left wondering, did the climbing scene just explode too quickly for the old guard to be able to pass on and instill acceptable/common practice and community norms?

Or is this generation just a bunch of d-bag a-holes, who feel like every opinion is equally valid even when the person spouting that opinion has no depth of knowlege or experience?

As the great Walter Sobchak said:
"STFU Donny, you're out of your element."

Lots of Donnys running around these parts.

Tom Sherman wrote:...but I challenge all you who feel the need to be condescending to dare answer all the "?'s" in my previous post...

Tom Sherman wrote: Here comes the flame! Frank you said you were going to respond to my argument, but you didnt you just hid behind a mask,1,2,3,4 in hiding. Then you go on to attack the most sensible argument in here? We don't need to take mpechs exaggerated elaboration as the gospel, that was an analogy meant to come off as the extreme. But his base point stands for itself. Why isn't the culture to redpoint routes placing the draws on lead? And this is not for me to argue, or for me to argue how one projects something. But it must be understood that by leaving your 'project' up, you're impacting how someone else could want to climb that climb. Go on someone in the room, repeat the useless words of "oh yeah and should there not be bolts?" Anyway I've stated over and over, that I'm willing to accept that this is a phenomenon that exists, but it doesn't go without it's impact.

You asked for someone to answer the questions you posted, not provide a rebuttal to an argument(you didn't make one). I provided answers.

I simply pointed out that to argue that the logical end point is for there to be fixed draws on every sport climb is to employ a common logical fallacy, many areas reserve long term fixed gear only for routes that are difficult to clean, etc. Again, practices vary from place to place.

Rob T wrote: Try this, "Nobody puts up gear protected sport climbs anymore?"

That's most of Indian Creek, but I digress...

Dylan B. wrote: Rap bolting is how you define a sport climb? I always defined it as a climb protected exclusively by bolts, whether rap-bolted or bolted on lead. Silly me.

That is a commonly used but incorrect definition of sport climbing. there are plenty of trad routes that are entirely bolt protected. The differentiation is that a climb that was bolted on lead from stances is a trad route. A sport route by definition is bolted either on rappel or is lead bolted while aiding the route.

This thread wandered nicely

Dylan B. wrote: Toproping doesn't "detract from the intent of sport climbing"? You mean my TRonsight is the same as your onsight, and more impressive than your red point? Being on the sharp end is not part of the "intent" or sport climbing? Maybe for you, but I've never heard anyone else take that position. Yeah, that's why I said "assuming it was properly bolted on lead."

Why would it be "proper" to bolt a sport climb on lead?

Dylan B. wrote: I always defined it as a climb protected exclusively by bolts, whether rap-bolted or bolted on lead. Silly me.

Is that an admission that you don't know what you are talking about?

Dylan B. wrote: I always defined it as a climb protected exclusively by bolts, whether rap-bolted or bolted on lead. Silly me.

Not silly. Just wrong. Happens to all of us sometimes.

Dylan B. wrote: Rap bolting is how you define a sport climb? I always defined it as a climb protected exclusively by bolts, whether rap-bolted or bolted on lead. Silly me.

I see you're from NC. Is Great White Way at Stone a sport climb? Let me answer that for you...no.

kennoyce wrote: That is a commonly used but incorrect definition of sport climbing. there are plenty of trad routes that are entirely bolt protected. The differentiation is that a climb that was bolted on lead from stances is a trad route. A sport route by definition is bolted either on rappel or is lead bolted while aiding the route.

John Byrnes has a definition with some merit that is something like a sport climb is bolted to be safe to fall. Can't remember the details, maybe he'll post it again here. At least in theory this could be done ground up.