Mountain Project Logo

problem with consensus rating on MP

Original Post
Todd R · · Vansion, CO / WY · Joined May 2014 · Points: 40

After Climbing Outer Space today, a "10 R" in eldo, I decided to look at others thoughts here as to the grade of the climb. Anyways, the consensus shown here on MP is 10 b/c R even though only (this is a semi-rough count) 18 out of about 125 people who have graded the route gave it an "R" rating. Why is this R reflected in the consensus grade if such a minority feel it's a "R" route?

FWIW, this route is most definitely not R, and from my understanding it seems like it was given this seriousness rating before the advent of small cams and RP's.

quick edit: I assume there's a possibility this may be a problem with other routes as well, but haven't looked into it...

Greg D · · Here · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 883
Todd Ra wrote: FWIW, this route is most definitely not R, and from my understanding it seems like it was given this seriousness rating before the advent of small cams and RP's.
That's really all there is to it. Nothing more, nothing less. Modern gear makes this route easier to protect. To be sure, you should fall on all those pieces that make you feel like it's not R. Give us a report.
Nick Goldsmith · · Pomfret VT · Joined Aug 2009 · Points: 440

My thoughts exactly. Anyone considering downgradeing protection rateings needs to take the falls first.

Bill Lawry · · Albuquerque, NM · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 1,812

Crowd control. ;-)

Todd R · · Vansion, CO / WY · Joined May 2014 · Points: 40

I think I may not have articulated what I was trying to say very well...

I was merely commenting on the reported consensus grade here on Mountain Project. For example, if a route's put in the system as .9, but most people rate it .10a, the reflected consensus grade is .10a.

I was merely pointing out that if a route is put in the database as R, but most people don't rate it R, then shouldn't the reported consensus grade reflect this consensus? Obviously, the reverse of this should also be true.

I really don't care what people think route grades are, and I definitely don't consider myself an accurate measuring stick. I was merely providing context for my observation, which, in retrospect, was unnecessary.

rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526

This is really a separate issue, but I know of a number of cases in which modern small gear has led to regrading R routes to PG. I'm not so sure this is right or appropriate, since as has been mentioned, most of the time the new pro hasn't actually been tested, and small gear is relatively unreliable no matter how good you think it is.

Nathan Self · · Louisiana · Joined Mar 2012 · Points: 90

Although most users rated the route 5.10b or c, there're also about 40 PG13 ratings to go with the 15 R ratings. Clearly folks are concerned about their ability to protect the route and the consequences thereof.

Nick Goldsmith · · Pomfret VT · Joined Aug 2009 · Points: 440

The protection rateing is actually pretty damn critical. that is what helps a visiting climber make decisions that hopefully give them a great day of climbing without getting in a situation where they are too far out of their element and possibly getting hurt or killed. I have followed enough younger strong climbers to know that often it is a damn good thing they are strong because an over reliance on not perfectly placed micro cams can bite you hard if you actually whip on one..... I would be pretty darn hesitant to downgrade protection rateings unless absolutly nessicary. If notheing else that R helps keeps the traffic managable.

Sam Thompson · · Tucson, AZ · Joined Sep 2015 · Points: 60

Don't worry OP, I understand that the point of your post wasn't to argue R grades but instead to understand how consensus is formed. Unlike everybody else responding to this thread.

I had the same thought a week or two ago myself. A route I climbed had an R rating, but out of the 15 or so people that actually rated it, only 2 had shown to give it an R rating. Definitely not the consensus, but the R existed before MP switched to consensus grading anyways. My only conclusion was that while numerical grades will go by consensus, safety ratings must stick to what the person who added the climb set it at. Maybe they're worried that when people grade a route, they will forget to also pick a safety rating and this will eventually have a negative effect? Maybe the algorithm didn't work quite as well for that portion? Maybe they believe that safety SHOULDN'T be a consensus vote? I think they're all viable reasons.

rgold · · Poughkeepsie, NY · Joined Feb 2008 · Points: 526

It is unreasonable to expect people to test marginal placements. But the issue remains. When I did the route many years ago, there was no pro for that traverse at all; the leader would have fallen back to the belay. The question is, is the situation now really all that different even though some gear is available?

The fact is that protection ratings are even more subjective and variable than climbing grades, and may depend on the type and brand of gear carried as well as the leader's skill in placing it and ability to hang on to place it. Perhaps it would make more sense to simply give the range of ratings and let the user try to sort it out.

simplyput . · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2013 · Points: 60
Dylan B. wrote:Rather than grade the risk, it would be possible to give objective, descriptive information about the protection. "30' runout above a solid #2, with only sparse options for microcams of dubious quality."
I think this would be a good supplement rather than replacement.
Nick Sweeney · · Spokane, WA · Joined Jun 2013 · Points: 969
Dylan B. wrote:Rather than grade the risk, it would be possible to give objective, descriptive information about the protection. "30' runout above a solid #2, with only sparse options for microcams of dubious quality."
"Outer Space 5.10 30' runout above a solid #2, with only sparse options for microcams of dubious quality" doesn't quite have the same ring to it as "Outer Space 5.10 R".
Nick Goldsmith · · Pomfret VT · Joined Aug 2009 · Points: 440

I still feel that if someone is bold enough to downgrade protection rateings they should be brave enough to go back up there to jump off and prove it.

Long Ranger · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2014 · Points: 619

Maybe the admin at MP could answer this question better than us guessing. But I would wager to say that its laziness or not knowing what to put really when it comes to the seriousness rating, so it's not taken in contention (is it an optional field?). If you read the comments on the route page, someone is arguing their point it should be "S" rated. *shrugs*

From what I remember reading, this was a pretty terrifying Kor nail up originally. Imagine being the dude that had to follow this guy around that day.

Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

General Climbing
Post a Reply to "problem with consensus rating on MP"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.