Bihedral 

This is a fun route but a little spicy on the second pitch. Also, I found it hard to find a good belay anchor at the top, which is a mass of rotten flakes. I went 30 ft farther to a large tree! The latest Rossiter tells you to walk off east, but I think it works out better to go west. You can traverse east back to the base of the climb (passing right under the 12a Edge of Reality).

Odd comment about the gear on P2. I did this route today and found great gear. To avoid rope drag, I placed two small cams out on the face in the first 30 feet or so, also got in a bomber nut before I moved back into the crack. Through the crux I used: #4, #1, #.75 Camalots (in that order). Top is broken and loose and yes, the crux felt a little more like 5.9, but it's splitting hairs. I got a great slingshot belay off the tree and was able to sit on the edge and take in the view. Either take George's advice and go west, or resign yourself to walking all the way down to the Riviera, then on a trail back to the buttress and then scrambling back up to the ledge...not cool. Rack up at the bottom of the buttress or even the car and carry shoes. Nice climb, long waste-o-time descent.

Sorry, two more thoughts: one comment about the gear at the first belay. Without small nuts and cams there would not have been a belay. I placed green and yellow Aliens behind a suspicious flake on the left, and equalized the #2 and #3 BD stoppers on the right. A wide setup but worked great with the double ropes. Second: BEWARE OF LOOSE ROCK!!!. The top of both pitches and the belay ledge are littered with loose rocks.

A really underappreciated route, a diamond in the rough. A variety of approaches. The easiest is a 4th class gully/corner system has poison ivy as you approach. You can do a number of trad things from left of the Riviera 5.7 or one of the L routes on the Riviera (Lease Agreement/New Lease on Life/Abandonment) and angle L 200' or even a manky long traverse in from above the Riviera. You can definitely find solid gear for 1st pitch if you look. You can definitely find good gear before the crux on the 2nd pitch. Trees are definitely the best anchors on top. This is reminiscent of climbing in the Park.

Shad ONeel- I ended the first pitch at the bolts, placed no gear until the second pitch really began and that worked out swell. Thought it was a really fun route, especially the second pitch. Walked off west with no trouble, since I knew no better.

This looked good from the ground so I thought I'd convince my sportclimbing kid to belay me. Both by now bored with the dinky Riviera we tromped up there. The first few feet were nice but after dragging the rope through clumps of shrubs, poision ivy, and knocking rocks onto a party doing the bolted slab below, I reached a belay rigged on loose flakes more reminnescent of the Eiger. I didn't have a huge rack with me, it's 5.8 right! By the time I hit the crux, the only gear I could get in that odd groove was dangerously below. The rubble on the top could start a landfill, and, for the rest of the summer, I could not convince my kid into any more trad climbs....

I found this climb to be very enjoyable. The second pitch esp. has a nice alpine feel. I agree with most of the comments about the approach and descent....the descent W requires minor downclimbing/butt sliding. I haven't tried the standard (Rossiter) descent...seemed much longer. I agree with Leo concerning the approach. L of Riviera offers a multitude of possibilities.

This climb is a good climb. The first half left me wondering why the route is called "something of a classic" but the second half answered that question. I believe if the entire route were like the second half, that it would be a much sought-after "destination climb. The crack in the second pitch does get a little "seepy" after a good rain and was wet in a spot or two this past Sunday morning. The route's second half had a few spots with moves that are 'hard for 5.8' and that did not protect that well. If you can keep your cool and not overgrip on barn-door moves, you'll be OK. As well, this route is GREAT done as a single 60M pitch from the ground to the top. If you use longer slings (2' and 1') you can avoid rope drag. Go for it.

I like to rack up and stash my pack at the start of the 4th-class scramble, so I don't have to go back up to the start of the climb to retrieve anything.

I find extra #1, #2, and #3 Camalots handy for both pitches. There are some hard moves up to a stance below the bulge on the second pitch. From the stance, you can place a #3.5 or #4 Camalot.

As you start cranking the bulge, it's possible (if you're tall enough) to place a #.75 Camalot in a good crack above the bulge, before you finish the crux sequence. This placement may not be possible for shorter climbers until the crux has been completed.

A decent belay can be gotten with Aliens and small cams behind a flake 30' up from the big ledge atop the first pitch. A big tree is the easiest belay at the top.

I'm not a good enough climber to do it all in one pitch; I'd run out of big gear.

If you do the descent to the left, check out the new climbs on the headwall (Don't Ask, Calling All Trad Climbers, What's Wrong With Parents Today). There is also a fun 5.9 bolted route on a wall 100 yards left the 4th-class scramble; you walk right past it on the descent.

Excellent stemming and laybacking, with some loose rock on ledges and spicy pro on the second pitch.

Great gear route. I thought both pitches were fun. The rock is much better and more cleanly fractured on the first pitch but the climbing is more interesting on the second.

We belayed at the bolted anchor then ran it out to the good crack on the second pitch (about 50 ft.). It's a trade off; you can either have sight of your leader on the second pitch or you can have a bomber anchor. Not both.

With the addition of the Bihedral Arete route, the descent is much better. Either exit off to the right near to end of the second pitch or downclimb to the anchor for the Arete route. We downclimbed which was a bit sketchy but with a belay. Two single rope raps.

Good route. Equal in quality to Bihedral Arete but fully trad. Enjoy.

I was able to create a good anchor about six feet to the left of the large ledge on the top of pitch one. It's moderately hanging but took four strong cam placements in "crack pockets". At least you don't have to be sketched by the gear.

After the first pitch I climbed the cool looking 5.9 crack (Heterohedral) on left wall. It was quite run-out on the face to it at 5.7+ or so, but a couple small cams made the crack above both safe and REALLY fun!

Ranks with Bitty Buttress for good BC 5.8 routes that I know of--safe if you take advantage of all gear placements (from small to 3.5 Camalot or so), but not exactly sewn up. Climbing may feel hard for the grade for those used to modern sport ratings. Do it with B. Arete and Rhodian Shores for good mix of trad, bolts, and mixed at similar grades.

The new 2-bolt anchor atop Hold The Line can be used by parties climbing the Bihedral Route for a belay at the end of the first pitch. This is better than using the bolt anchor atop Rhodian Shores, since the new anchor is 20' higher and farther left, affording better communication with the leader on the second pitch and fewer issues with rope drag. See Photo.

Of course, you can bypass this anchor, continue up to the loose ledge, and finagle in a gear anchor if that is your preference.

While working on the route Puff Daddy, I installed a belay/rappel anchor on a small ledge near the top of the Bihedral. This anchor can also be used as a second-pitch belay anchor for the Bihedral Route.

It is possible to rappel from this anchor to the anchor atop Hold The Line with a 60m rope. From the anchor atop Hold The Line, another rappel with a 60m rope gets you to the ground.

These two rappels greatly simplify the descent off the Bihedral Route. Instead of doing a long, unpleasant walk-off to the west, or a belayed downclimb to the anchors atop Bihedral Arete/Flags of Our Fathers, two straight-shot raps get you back to the ground. See Photo.

Of course, you can bypass this anchor, continue up loose, broken rock to the top of the Bihedral, and do the long walk-off if that is your preference.

Ron,
"Of course, you can bypass this anchor, continue up loose, broken rock to the top of the Bihedral, and do the long walk-off if that is your preference."

Is that your way of saying "If you don't like the bolts, just don't clip them?"

It is probably best for all considered to avoid installing bolted Rap anchors on historic/existing routes that do not have them. Not everyone is going to appreciate that.

Of course, you can bypass this advice, continue to retrobolt climbs in Boulder Canyon, and do the long walk of a bolt war if that is your preference.

See photo added to page.

Tony...a number of older routes in Eldo have had bolted anchors added to them.

What is your point?

Are you saying if Ron doesn't listen to your advice...there is going to be a bolt war??

I can't predict what would happen, but I know that is one possibility, as history dictates.

If I was up there anyway and I thought that they intruded too much on the already existing climb, I would consider removing them myself. Of course that's different than a bolt war.

I am aware that there are anchors added in Eldo too. I've agreed with some of them and disagreed with others. I've always felt free to voice my opinion regardless of if I thought it to be the minority or majority.

Tony,

The lower anchor is part of the sport route Hold The Line. It is also the starting anchor for the route Puff Daddy. It is necessary for those routes, and as a bonus can be used by climbers on the Bihedral Route, just like the Rhodian Shores anchor. Please do not even consider removing this anchor.

The upper anchor was installed to facilitate work on the route Puff Daddy, and while moving loose rock at the top of the Bihedral. It is also used by those belaying Puff Daddy from the top. I plan to use it again to investigate other upper wall routes, and to rap down and remove loose rock from the midway ledge on Bihedral Route. As a bonus it can be used by climbers on the Bihedral Route. Please do not remove this anchor either.

Climbers have for years cautioned about the difficult belay anchors on the Bihedral Route, in areas of loose rock. With the increasing numbers of climbers visiting this crag, now that there are a number of good moderate sport routes, minimizing the potential for rockfall is a major concern. My partner and I spent 20 minutes moving loose rocks near the top of the Bihedral to a safer place, where they would be less likely to be dislodged by climbers and fall onto parties below. There is still a lot of loose rock on the midway ledge of the Bihedral Route which we did not have time to deal with.

I strongly suggest that you leave the new anchors alone. They are needed for other routes and they help alleviate a potentially dangerous situation.

Are you also going to go up and remove the rap route on the Diamond by the Casual Route, and the rap route on the Petit Grepon? Neither was there when I did those routes back in the '80s.

"Are you also going to go up and remove the rap route on the Diamond by the Casual Route, and the rap route on the Petit Grepon? Neither was there when I did those routes back in the '80s."

What the heck are you talking about? I'm talking about the Bihedral and anchors that are on a route, not a nearby rap route. Are you going to place them on the Bastille by Blind Faith, and put a new one on Sabre? That is not relevant to this discussion.

Ron, do you understand that not everyone shares your values and wants retrobolted anchors on 40 year old trad climbs? As you should be well aware, there has been a lively discussion on the ACE FRHC forum on if a 'new route' should even be installed if it 'requires' retro-bolting a belay on an existing route.
One might also reasonably conclude that if it was necessary to alter an existing route to put in a new one, then perhaps the new one should have never been installed. And if the anchor is required in order to safely use the route but is removed, then by a matter of course the whole route should be removed. All of it.

You should be A LOT more worried about what someone will do next when they STOP engaging you in discussion than when they do. The sneaky ones are the ones to watch out for. Sometimes negative feedback is the consequence of doing something you know is going to be controversial. You even added the 'if you don't like the bolts don't clip them' note in your first post, which seems like a premeditated argument. If I am understanding it correctly, you fully expected some disagreement or protest. So here you have it.

Anyway, I may or may not remove them, and that is also something someone else may or may not do as well. You didn't ask if you could place them because you didn't have to. Same goes for me and everyone else. I'll give no less respect to your FA than you gave to someone else's, I promise.

Note, I also commented that I though the first belay on Bihedral Arete should have been otherwise positioned to avoid retrobolting the historical precedent of the 'Crack Route' that it is on. I'm more tweaked about this and let that one go because nobody ever climbs that 'crack route' anyway, or so it seems. But people do climb this route, and frequently.

So are you the one who bolted Bitty Buttress too?

No, Tony, I did not add a bolt anchor to Bitty Buttress. And please do not remove anchors on sport routes at the Bihedral.

"I strongly suggest that you leave the new anchors alone. They are needed for other routes and they help alleviate a potentially dangerous situation."

Very well. I strongly suggest that you give consideration to where you put anchors for new routes & try to avoid existing climbs. Maybe certain new routes are not such a great idea if they require retro-bolting a historic one.

Ron, Tony, Bob,

I too saw those bolts 3/20/7. I felt saddened to see the addition of these bolts (anchor bolts from Rhodian Shores, Hold the Line, Dan's Line, and the start of Puff Daddy), but the holes were already drilled. These are either on the line of The Bihedral or very close. These 4 sets of anchors (especially 3 sets) are all fairly close to each other. Also, Heterohedral appears to be crossed by some of this new bolting. Nonetheless, I'll probably climb these new lines when rocks aren't being sent down the cliff, because I climb all sorts of routes.

I am not trying to start a bolt war. Further, I have no intention of removing the bolts that effectively retrobolt parts of these lines. However, they certainly change the character of the climb, The Bihedral, which FWIW is one of my favorite 2 at the cliff (the other being Le Nouveau Riche). Rossiter even described it as a sort of classic. Certainly, if one clips the top anchor bolts and raps, the climb is diminished. I agree with Tony in that some feedback may be useful to those who choose to add bolts which change the character of previous routes.

Also, in some ways, FWIW, the descent issues add to the overall experience of the climb. I recall a number of trips up The Bihedral where certainly the walkoff added to the experience...though less "convenient." Sure, I tried out the rap below Hold the Line after climbing Flags of Our Fathers, so as to know what was created, but I've also descended from this same ledge without those bolts.

Ron, you, as a well-seasoned, astute, rational, local climber, certainly know the history of the Boulder area climbing. Isn't there sort of a respect for those who came before where you don't add bolts which change the character of routes? It certainly does apply to Eldorado Canyon, which you are distinctly familiar. Bob, did you see the bolting on this cliff in person? Wouldn't it bother you if someone came back and put bolts along or crossing some of your many, excellent, classic lines? It strikes me as a climber of bolted and non-bolted routes as a bit odd that a climber of your experience, Ron, would place bolts that change the character of established routes...perhaps even disrespectful of those who came before us?

Leo... a few anchor bolts are not that big of an issue in my life. I got bigger things to worry about.

As I stated before...numerous routes in the Boulder area, on the Diamond and throughout climbing areas in the USA...have had anchor bolts added to them after the FA.

This is not the first or last time this will happen.

Later, Bob

Bob, please pardon my lack of clarity, these anchor bolts are in the middle of the 1st pitch. Yes, there are many more important things to worry about, but until this skirmish I hadn't commented. Peace...hope all is well in NM.

Several points:

• The anchor on Rhodian Shores (first ascent in July 1996 according to Mark Rolofson's latest guidebook), can be clipped while climbing the first pitch of Bihedral Route, although it is a bit low and left of the natural climbing line.

• Some people have used the Rhodian Shores anchor as a belay anchor on Bihedral Route; see earlier comments by Shad O'Neel and Scott Conner. Evidently their climbing experience was not diminished, nor were they saddened, by the presence of this anchor.

• Good gear placements (green and red Camalots) exist on Bihedral Route just right of the anchor on Hold The Line. Matt Seefeldt used these gear placements as his belay anchor on Bihedral Route. Those intent on a pure trad experience on Bihedral Route have no need to clip the anchor on Hold The Line.

• The upper anchor on Dan's Line is about 20' left and 10' higher than the anchor on Hold The Line; it has no impact on Bihedral Route.

• There is no separate anchor at the start of Puff Daddy; this route starts from the anchor on Hold The Line or Dan's Line.

• The first lead protection bolt on Puff Daddy is up quite high and well left of the Heterohedral crack. It has no impact on Heterohedral or Bihedral Route.

• The second pitch of Heterohedral traverses over to the crack above the anchors on Dan's Line and Hold The Line. These anchors have no impact on Heterohedral.

• The bolt anchor near the top of the Bihedral was placed to facilitate work on Puff Daddy, to reposition loose rock to a safe spot, and will be used to rap down to clear loose rock from the midway ledge on Bihedral Route. It is also used by those belaying Puff Daddy from the top.

Thank you for the response, Ron. Again, perhaps I wasn't clear, but I didn't think Dan's Line anchors would affect The Bihedral - I suspected it would affect Heterohedral. My error on seeing 4 sets of anchors, but I didn't want to climb below y'all while you were knocking rocks down in the area, and it appeared there were anchor bolts down and left from where Mike was hanging while you were drilling. Yes, I know that those bolts of Rhodian Shores were put in back in ['97 - I went back & checked my notes]. How time flies by. I had chatted with Mark prior to that about the potential for routes in that area...my error. In addition, to be clear, I suspect the anchor bolts from Hold the Line are close enough to the climbing of The Bihedral, that it will affect the climbing on that pitch. I've certainly wandered over in the area of the anchor bolts of Hold the Line initially when I first climbed The Bihedral, and I suspect others may as well. Further, the natural belay for The Bihedral sets you up in a very good position to belay the 2nd pitch. In the end, I suspect these additional anchor bolts will affect the climbing of both The Bihedral & Heterohedral. Certainly, one can choose not to clip the bolts, but it diminishes the experience...as I suspect you understand.

Leo,

There is a lower anchor on Dan's Line. It's 100' from the start, so you can lower with a 60m rope. The higher anchor, where Mike was, is about 115' up. So there are 4 sets of anchors in the area (2 on Dan's Line, 1 on Hold The Line, 1 on Rhodian Shores). The lower anchor on Dan's Line is nowhere near Bihedral Route or Heterohedral, so I didn't show it in the photo.

When we were repositioning loose rock at the top of the Bihedral, we tried very hard not to send anything down since there were people below. Only one small rock went over the edge accidentally. A bit later, another party knocked a rock off Bihedral Arete. Those are the only two rocks that came down as far as I know.

We also made it a point to put the first lead bolt on Puff Daddy very high, so it could not be clipped by climbers on Heterohedral. There are one or two gear placements that can be made on Puff Daddy before getting to the first bolt. It was important to us to not impact the climbing on Heterohedral, while still creating a fun new route for people to enjoy.

Regarding Rhodian Shores: I don't think it was an error to discuss route possibilities with Mark Rolofson. Rhodian Shores is an excellent sport route that many people have enjoyed. And personally, my climbing experience on Bihedral Route has not been diminished by the Rhodian Shores anchor. I have often clipped the anchor while leading the first pitch of Bihedral Route, and I've been glad it's there.

P.S. Maybe it's time to split most of these comments to a forum thread?

So what is sound like to me is that Ron and partners took the time to set some anchors, create some new fun SPORT routes and clean loose rock so no one would get hurt.

That's just terrible!

Ron, thanks for the clarification. My LASIK-fixed eyes do work. Thanks for trying not to affect the Heterohedral route, but I suspect that the anchors for Dan's Line may affect the mental aspect for that route. Certainly, Rhodian Shores' & Hold the Line's anchors effectively retrobolt some of The Bihedral and affect the mental aspect of that route. Also, I know not everyone has the same feeling about clipping new bolts on existing routes. Had this been a more popular/famous route, it probably have triggered more of a response (Bitty Buttress or Naked Edge come to mind).

Also, not that it is/was a big deal, but there were more than 3 rocks that went down the route 3/20/7 while we were there. Some were probably sent/knocked down by Mike.

Bob, thank you for your opinions. Again, please pardon my lack of clarity, but I never thought that cleaning rock was terrible (it just was a reason why I didn't personally climb up to inspect the 4 anchors that day). I clean off loose rock frequently (and even on that same day below the newly installed rap). I never thought that creating new lines (bolted or not bolted) was terrible (e.g. we did a previously unreported line between Rhodian Shores & Hold the Line [9] years ago). I simply questioned the respect for established lines having bolts which affect their character/experience by Mark, Steve, Diane, Dan, Ron, Mike, or whomever.

P.S. we can move this to a different thread, but these are issues relevant to this route. Perhaps, once the discussion slows down.

Leo...Things are great in NM...thanks for asking.

My remark was a litte tongue-in-cheek and really not pointed at you.

Leo,

You mention the bolted anchors would be more of a problem if it was on a classic such as the Naked Edge. I seem to remember when I first did the Naked Edge in 1980, as I was leading the last pitch, Candelaria was freaked out at the belay and said to me, "what ever you do, don't fall!" There is now a 3 bolt belay there. I don't remember a fuss when that anchor was installed. Also, Dan Hare put in the anchor on Dan's Line. If it impacts Heterohedral, he was on the first ascent of that route.

Bob, I'm glad you're doing well in NM.

Greg, while you are probably far more familiar with the events of the 80s (I wasn't), perhaps again I was not clear enough to which I was referring. These anchor bolts from Rhodian Shores and Hold the Line are different than the anchor bolts you write about. They are in the middle of the 1st pitch. They are not at the belay for The Bihedral. The closer analogy, to which I was referring, is the bolts from Genius Loci, added in 1989, some of which were clippable from the Naked Edge. This resulted in the controversy which led to the removal of the upper bolts with the approval of ACE's FHRC. Did you do The Naked Edge when the bolts of Genius Loci were still in place?

Yet, in a different way, the bolts added to the 1st belay of Bitty Buttress, a relative classic of the same difficulty as The Bihedral, were received with mixed reviews and the removal of those bolts (FWIW, not me) created some less-than-polite discussions.

Yes, I did understand that Dan's Line was put up by Dan & Heterohedral's FA included Dan. That's why I included his name in the above discussion, but I suspect Dan (like Mark) is not a visitor to MP.com. I'm a bit curious what Bob Hanson & Alan Bradley think of these. Again, I'm saddened to see these additions...more so the ones affecting The Bihedral, which is partly why I posted this here.

Leo...both Rhodian Shores & Bihedral Arete are better climbs than (star rating) Bihedral Route.

Give these routes some time.

Later, Bob

Bob, respectfully, in my opinion, Bihedral is a better route. All are roughly in the same range of difficulty. Bihedral not only challenges the average climber some physically, it also challenges some mentally. Neither Rhodian or Bihedral Arete have much mental challenge...mostly physical...thus less satisfying. I realize folks who particularly like bolts may disagree. To be fair, I have some bias about Rhodian based upon my error on discussing the area with Mark prior to Rhodian Shores.

I agree w/ Leo about the quality of the Bihedral. Definitely a lot more mentally engaging than Rhodian or the Arete. These are also both good climbs, but the Bihedral definitely stands out more in my mind. Just my .02.

Warning! There is a large horn about to break off midway up the first pitch. I would have removed it but was afraid of killing someone at the Riviera below. When it comes off it will impact at the base of the Bihedral Arete.