The Gym Arete 

Cool climb but not really an arete mor like a rounded face....

Hasn't this always been called 12a?

I rated the Gym Arete 5.12a/b on the FA back in 1987. What is the big deal, 12a, 12b, does it really matter that much?

Wow! Thanks Bob D'Antonio. As a founding father of the Shelf, I was guessing that this was your route. How did it ever come to pass that all the FA data were neglected in Mark Van Horn's book? I was under the impression, perhaps wrong, that you had worked together on several routes.

Richard, glad you enjoy the Gym Arete. It is a fine route. One of the many down at Shelf. I never worked with Van Horn on any route in the area and rarely talked to him. He was not invovled with early FA's and I never saw him down at Shelf in the early going.To my knowledge he has never asked Richard Aschert or any other (me included)climbers who were active with the early FA's and even the newer routes at Cactus Cliff. Kinda strange? It is sad that the history in Van Horn book in somewhat incomplete. Richard Aschert a great person and climber who was barely mentioned in the history section. Little is knowed about the routes and how we did them. Most of the older routes (Lats, French are Here, etc,) were hand drilled and we used tri-cams in some of the pockets. Shelf is a great area and one of the first sport climbing areas in the US. Richard Thompson new guide to Cactus Cliff list FA and he is in the process with a new guide to Shelf, complete with history. Feel free to contact with any questions that I may be able to answer. Thanks, Bob D.

Bob,

I do believe that the FA data are important, and I will pick up Rico's guide. The effort spent in getting a line in, the cleaning, the rehersal, the cost, and the imagination are part of the history that I like to invoke when I'm on a good line. I can't recall all the times that I have looked up at a route simply jazzed by the imagination of a great line or marveled at what an eye it took to spy the line in the first place. It is interesting in this context that many of the European guides cite the equippers and re-equippers of a route and not the single individual who apparently snagged the first free ascent. Unless the route is right at the cutting edge, the FA information is far more informative and interesting than the FFA data.

Glad to see old Bob and Richard patting each other on the back...also like to read about how Richard really likes to see FA info in a guide, this seems to be a common thread in his comments on routes at Shelf. Van Horn, right or wrong, left the FA info out of the book and explained why...if you do not like it you can buy the Rick T. book and read all about the crappy new routes installed in the past few years...lots of nice choss with only a few quality lines here and there. If the lack of FA info was such a tragedy, why didn't someone step up and write a new guide years ago? Too lazy? Producing a guide book is not easy work and at the very least Van Horn took a shot...more than can be said for anyone else.

To the no-name, Anonyymous Coward. I put the FA's in for Shelf Road, not Richard Aschert. I don't think we are giving each other and credit. Richard and I are friends who have spent lot of time together climbing and we have done a lot of FA's together. Is there something wrong with that? I did not insult Mark Van Horn's guidebook, just pointing the lack of history and FA's. Some people do like to know such information.If you have a problem with that just ignore such information and don't get so riled up about it. It is somewhat childish to call all the new routes at Shelf Road, worthless rubble piles, some folks have put a lot of time and effort into these routes. If the routes are "worthless choss piles" explain to me why Cactus Cliff is so popular with Front Range climbers. Why didn't you attached you name with your so strong and forceful comments? Bob D.

Maybe I use this moniker being aware of your perchance for unpleasantries...you are correct that you did not directly insult Van Horn's guide but, in a left handed way, you did an even better job...with lines like -_

"I never worked with Van Horn on any route in the area and rarely talked to him. He was not invovled with early FA's and I never saw him down at Shelf in the early going.To my knowledge he has never asked Richard Aschert or any other(me included)climbers who were active with the early FA's and even the newer routes at Cactus Cliff."

Reading this, I wouldn't say you are endorsing his book now are you? Also, I did not say that ALL the new routes are rubble piles, just the vast majority of the new routes. There are great, new lines that have been installed but that has not been the norm.

You ask-_

"If the routes are "worthless choss piles" explain to me why Cactus Cliff is so popular with Front Range climbers"

Maybe it is because it is nice and warm in the winter? I dig the quote but who are you quoting..it was not from my post; Never said anything about "worthless". Maybe they are mostly, read MOSTLY, middle-of-the-road climbs on less than perfect rock. Can we agree on that?

Lastly, maybe I just like crusing these msg boards, posting loads of shit and seeing who gets the most tweaked. It is not far removed from the general rehashing and bickering that is the norm.

oh yea...the reference was to this Richard Wright character, not Richard Aschert. May as well get the right people stired up...eh?

AC - are you suggesting that I should care about your comment?

What really bothers me is your lack of respect for the people who took the time, effort and money do those routes. Are they all 3 stars, no I don't so, but Cactus Cliff has turn into a pretty nice cliff. Have you climbed all the new routes so that you could arrive at such a definite opinion? Or is that you done so many three stars FA's, that give you the right to slander other people routes? With reference to Mark Van Horn, I was just stating a fact. Dave Dangle, Darrly Roth, Richard Aschert and I did a lot of FA's as did other climbers from the Colorado Springs area. I left the area in 1988, so maybe he was active after that. By putting my name or other climbers name to a route they did the FA of is not looking for praise, its just a fact. Praise should come from climbers who climb and enjoy the route. Did we do them all? No, but thats a pretty good reason to have first ascents and a history of the area in the guidebook. You are not just insulting me for my effort on the cliff, you can also add-on Rick Thompson, Richard Aschert, Dave Dangle, Vino Kodas, Darrly Roth, The Boys from Pueblo, Bob & Carrie Robertson and any other person who has put the effort into a first ascent. I don't mind taking a pot shot once in awhile, what I dont like is your childlike behavior and the way you hide behind the AC icon. Grow-up!

And now... back to the climbing. The direct start isn't wildly harder than the upper arete. However, I receieved excellent beta for the tricky sequence of clipping, downclimbing and traversing at the third bolt on the direct start. I'd give 12a for the arete and 12b for the straight up version. The direct is a great combination of steep pulling at the bottom and extremely technical movement above.

I spoke too soon. The direct version is harder than I thought -- in fact it's the first climb at that grade in Shelf that I haven't been able to finish in a day. It must be solid for 5.12c, or even c/d, as the Van Horn book lists.

By the way, my name is Darryl Roth, NOT Darrly Roth. Please take note Bob, thanks.

Kids, can't we all just get along? Come on now; just agree that this route a mega classic, and lets get back to the business of climbing. History will sort itself out.