Remedy 5.12-
| 865 page views
Good page? (1 like)   |
| Type: | Sport, 60 feet |
| Consensus: | 5.12- [details] |
| FA: | JJ Schlick |
| New Route: | Yes |
| Submitted By: | JJ Schlick on Sep 16, 2006 |
| |
DG working out the low crux.
Add Photo  Printer View
No longer private property. See below. MORE INFO >>>
Any climbing done here is technically trespassing. I am posting it for history sakes and those undeterred by legal ramifications. Climb at your own legal risk.
This information is a public crowdsourcing effort between the Access Fund,
and Mountain Project.
You should confirm closures, restrictions, and/or related dates.
|
|
Keeping climbing areas open and conserving the climbing environment
|
|
Description A very nice line with two distinct cruxes. Start on scruffy rock to reach the first bolt, then out onto the main face. The first crux comes at the third bolt and is a mix of sidepulls and deadpoints. At the middle of the route soak up the rest as the top half is quite steep for WI standards. Climb jugs on the arete past two bolts. The third bolt on the arete is a hard clip and right at the begining of the second crux. Cranking on some small holds and divots will set you up for the throw. Jugs to the anchors from there.
When you are lowering off take a look at the rediculous botch job to the right. Four ugly glued holds were abandoned by their creator. Probably out of self loathing. One of these holds is close by at the crux, though I didn't use it on the FA. These holds are a good example of what not to do when route developing. There isn't even a line where they are at. It is just fucking stupid. Anyhoo, I ripped the one bolt that was over there, and whoever is responsible for this mess should be ashamed. Publicly and privately.
Location Middle of the north wall.
Protection Seven bolts to a two bolt chain anchor.
Remedy. Photo doesn't do it justice. I will get ...
|
BETA PHOTO: Side view of remedy
| |
By TravisMelin
From: Roanoke, VA La Crosse, WI
May 2, 2007
rating: 5.12a/b
| Broke a large foot hold off on the top crux last fall, softball sized. Anyone been up there since? It'll make that last more a bit more difficult. |
By TravisMelin
From: Roanoke, VA La Crosse, WI
Aug 4, 2007
rating: 5.12a/b
| To answer my own question it is way harder. |
By ChrisFrayer
From: Platteville, Wi
Oct 16, 2010
rating: 5.12a
| Two boulder problems separated by a no hands rest. The last boulder problem is fun and dynamic, and about the same difficulty as the lower problem. Great route. |
By Trad Nanny
Aug 4, 2011
rating: 5.12a
| That is quite the throw to the finish. Has the rating been adjusted since Melin broke that hold?
I set this up by rapping off chains that are just right of the end of Buddha Bukstein Crack. Rapping off those and angling left (if facing the rock) will get you to the chains for Remedy. |
By Trad Nanny
Nov 8, 2011
rating: 5.12a
| The first crux is the hardest, lay-backing off a small seam and dead-pointing for an ok hold. The upper throw isn't bad with the right holds. I got the good hold on the arete with my left, pinched the epoxy'd hold on the face and put my right foot one a nice divot near the arete.
I thought 12a but the first crux can be low percentage. |
By JJ Schlick
Administrator
From: Flagstaff, AZ
Mar 1, 2012
| Did the broken hold force you onto the glued stuff? I didn't need to use any of that shit on the FA. Just curious. |
By Trad Nanny
Mar 1, 2012
rating: 5.12a
| I admire your ethics. I had never been on it before the hold broke and I couldn't tell where it was but grabbing the epoxied hold seemed like the only way. Perhaps Melin was avoiding the the epoxy hold and thus it's "way harder" that way. Still on grade if using the epoxy hold. |
By ChrisFrayer
From: Platteville, Wi
May 17, 2012
rating: 5.12a
| When we climbed this last year we didn't use any of the glued holds either. Think big. Is it possible to pry off the glued holds? Or would that create more of a mess? |
By Trad Nanny
May 18, 2012
rating: 5.12a
| That would probably create a bigger mess, lots of glue on them, it would be hard to get underneath the hold, and I sure as shit don't support prying.
Perhaps with the broken foothold this is reachy and hard without using the glued holds? Unfortunately, maybe it's better to simply include the glued holds and downgrade this to hard 11. |
By ChrisFrayer
From: Platteville, Wi
May 18, 2012
rating: 5.12a
| I am not sure that I was suggesting a down grade to 11+.
Prying certainly has a place in route development depending upon local ethic / rock type / rock quality / etc. I can't remember exactly what the glued holds look like - though I was slightly appalled. Just trying to think of a way to 'Remedy' that colossal f-up. |
By Trad Nanny
May 18, 2012
rating: 5.12a
| I'm not saying you were suggestion to downgrade it, I just think the route may have become contrived to avoid the glued holds at this point. It's too bad that whomever glued it didn't allow everything to follow it's natural course, that's my policy but prying something off is on par with gluing it in my mind.
Anyway I think whomever climbs this from now on can choose to climb it with or with out the glued hold as we can't erase the past on this one.
All in all a minor blemish on an otherwise great climb in a great WI satellite crag. |
|
RSS Feed
5 more...
Slideshow
