Brown Cloud Arête 

Is there really such a thing as a three star route at N. Table? That one route that, despite rabid dogs, inclement weather, and threats of departure from your SO, you would still go up and do for the 17th time just for the experience? For that matter, is there such a thing as a three star sport route at all? Compare the experience of any sport route with, say, Yellow Spur, or "any" alpine route. Maybe there should be a separate "star" scale for each area.

I'll second that - what is this idea of calling sport routes 'classic' and awarding them three stars? I mean, I've done some great sport routes, and I've also eaten a few pretty good quarter pounders from the Donald. That doesn't mean I would compare them to a prime cut of tenderloin.

Classic sport route is right up there with "gourmet hot dog", "stellar shoelace", "luxury trailer home" or "classic porta-potty". It is just nonsense.

A 3 star rating can be used at Table Pile, but only to compare a route with neighboring routes. However, Table Pile is a 1 star climbing area, so nothing there would compare to a 3 star route at a 3 star area. To say there are no 3 star sport routes is a bit short-sighted. Of course the Yellow Spur is brilliant, as are many alpine routes, but so are Bullet the Blue Sky, Lost Horizon, Slave to the Rythmn, the Example, Plan B, etc.

My 2 cents.

I will admit guilt on my part towards the over-evaluation of routes, including this one. In my defense, I will say that this route was done within 3 months of the start of the site - where the realm of possibilities were not that clear.

However, the evaluation is just that: the thoughts of that one person who did the route. We've seen across the site on different routes lively discussions on whether a route is a choss pile or a memorable classic. And while the site encourages this qualitative debate and discussion, it is weaker perhaps in it's ability to allow a community consensus on more quantitative figures such as the "quality" or ratings. "Quality", of course, depends greatly on how you choose to define such a characteristic (see Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintainance).

Perhaps in the future we will have tools that will allow the community to develop a consensus on these items.... or we might already be working them now.

I'm probably guilty of some over-evaluation as well, probably attributable to lack of sufficient time for reflection before posting. Steve makes some interesting points, however, and I think he may be right that the "star rating" is relative to the area, and that comparing sport climbs to trad or alpine climbs is "apples and oranges."

Still, were I to make a list of the top 10, or even the top 50 climbs I have ever done, not all would be considered "classics" (which is a whole 'nuther discussion), but they all would involve something more than just movement over rock.

Now you've done it, opened up the whole "which is better" debate: sport vs trad, ala which is better: snowboarding vs skiing.

[hmmm. An interesting analogy.]

And moreso, which is better, a 12 pitch epic or a one pitch splitter.

I stopped reading Skiing (or snowboarding) magazines long ago because I became bored with a meaningless squabble that the industry fanned. Please let's not have that here.

It would seem if you wanted to do this justice, without needing to publish a Sport Climb site vs a Trad Climb site [again, ala Ski Magazine vs Snowboarding magazine), you'd almost have a rating for each "facet" of a climb. We all, as Darin states, have an internal rating system based on a climb's "facets" that may or may not be consistent with other's methods of judging. However, if the facets were stated as such: "scenery", "climbing variety", "stone quality", "athletic challenge", "Sphicter Factor [degree of pucker]", "belays [crib-like or Spanish Inquisition]"....shoot, the list goes on....we could rate each facet and could pick the facet that was most important to us. A lot more work, but then we really could rate apples vs apples and oranges vs oranges on the same site.

Oh boy, Myke, another web architecture change, eh?

And btw....back to the ski vs snowboarding analogy: I bought the first cracked steel edge/p-tex bottomed snowboard ever made and loved it - still do. But I never gave up my skis...why? It's all fun if it's on snow...sound familiar? It's ALL fun if it's on rock!

Interesting discussion. Excellent points Steve - keeping the quality rating relative to the area is probably more useful, and reduces elitism in opinions (of which this Coward is certainly guilty).

Personally, I think there is trad, there is sport, there is climbing. None of the above takes place at Table. But that's my opinion - and if someone who happens to enjoy the place (I'm too snobby for it...) wants to learn about another person's opinions on the quality of some particular route, then this site is an excellent resource. And getting better all the time.

While I do find the 3-star kiss to be applied a bit liberally on this site, I also am glad to see the enthusiasm coming through from the contributors who do so.

But I gotta run - time to go toprope my ultra-uber-classic project at the gym...

Here, Here! I think Steve is right. Let's keep a little perspective. North Table provides an extremely useful venue for the working crowd that needs to shag a few lines after work. However, being a little stingy with the star allocation won't keep us from getting in the after work pump - even if we are only climbing on half star routes.

Second thought: This is not something I have ever given that much thought to, but for my own purposes I have attributed stars like grading a test. The test, or the route, is worth some maximum value, say 100 points or three stars. The characteristics of the test result or the route can knock its value down based on simple criteria. A wrong answer looses a point for the test, and stars get knocked off a route in analogous fashion. For example: I drop a star for a significant break in continuity, or poor protection, or lousy rock (which can drop all the stars in one step), contrivance, or any of several other criteria. It's at least a systematic approach to quality rating, although it doesn't allow for comparison between crags or areas.

For me at least, enthusiasm about a climb definitely encourages star-creep. And because I get off on climbing just about anything, the result is a lot of high evaluations. But damn, climbing these routes are just so damn fun! Despite the deserved shots at North Table... I still have a great time whenever I go there.

As far as another architecture change (michael's comment).... well, Shit. What we should do is everybody who uses this site pays me _50 a year, and I work on this thing full time. Damn, would this site kick ass! oh well, I can dream at least, can't I...

(putting on another pot of coffee, and getting to work on the ice conditions application - you ice climbers are going to LOVE the stuff we got coming your way this season)

Pretty darn good route name though...making fun of the less than quality setting and rock.

I avoided this area for the better part of a decade after having to belly-kick the G*$D@*! dogs that got in a fight over MY lunch on top of the rope on which my partenr was attached to the other end and leading. I only saw one dog fight yesterday, but saw tons of $hit on the trails and at the base.This climb is an OK climb... better than some others in the area, not as good as others. Seriously though, I think it's one star. I didn't go home and call my friends up and tell them about this great route they had to go do... More like they ask me about the area and I shrug and say "that one's better than some others- at least it was over 30 feet tall."As for the grade, of the 10 routes at Table yesterday, I found the 10's/11's to be closer to the mark for grades (the 8's-9's that I did seemed inflated). This particular route though seemed very easy at the grade and not much (any?) harder than Deck Chairs On the Titanic. Heck, Bullet the Brown CLoud spit me off and seemed hard for 5.11a. Obviously it's not the whole area, but this route particularly seemed overgraded.

This route is worth doing if you're in the area. The moves won't blow you away, but they're not bad either. I also agree with Tony that the rating is pretty soft.