By Shumin Wu
Mar 14, 2009
| Paul Dieterle wrote: if somebody bolts a route that was originally trad, you can still climb it trad.
As John has pointed out earlier, there is one significant difference between climbing with gear and climbing trad: commitment. Perhaps it's difficult to understand when you are 15, but having the option to bail off at the first sign of trouble cannot be compared to making an commitment knowing the potential for dire consequences, even if the outcome is the same. | 
FLAG |
By Elijah Flenner
Mar 14, 2009
| Part of me thinks that replying to this thread is a bad idea, but here goes.
I will preface my argument with my view on climbing. To me, climbing is important since I enjoy climbing, it helps me relieve stress and lets me spend time with some great friends. However, I do not believe that climbing is important in the grand scheme of things. The economy, wars, global poverty are important, but climbing is not.
Since there is many types of climbing, different people enjoy climbing for different reasons. Some like the physical aspect, some prefer the mental aspect. Some want to do sport climbs, others want to do long gear protected routes, while others may want to just boulder. I like all of these.
For a subset of climbers, the presence of bolts detracts from their experience and they do not enjoy climbing as much if it is possible to clip a bolt. It reduces the commitment no matter how you look at it. Since they should be allowed to enjoy climbing, routes without bolts should exist and I believe that the argument "just don't clip the bolts" is not acceptable to a significant number of climbers. It does destroy the experience for some climbers, thus destroying the route for these climbers.
For many climbers, the Gunks would not be the Gunks if it were bolted. It just would not be the same climbing area, and the mere presence of the bolts would destroy the area for a significant amount of the climbing population. If the presence of bolts does not detract from your experience, then you may not understand why it does ruin the climb for others. However, it should just be understood that it does, so lets not ruin climbing for a large number of climbers by bolting everything.
edit: I was beat to the punch on commitment. |
FLAG |
By Unassigned User
Mar 14, 2009
| Shumin Wu wrote: As John has pointed out earlier, there is one significant difference between climbing with gear and climbing trad: commitment. Perhaps it's difficult to understand when you are 15, but having the option to bail off at the first sign of trouble cannot be compared to making an commitment knowing the potential for dire consequences, even if the outcome is the same.
If your afraid of dying or getting injured, then why are you climbing that route in the first place? I DO understand the difference between trad and sport as I have done both. |
FLAG |
By Shumin Wu
Mar 14, 2009
| Paul Dieterle wrote: If your afraid of dying or getting injured, then why are you climbing that route in the first place?
Good question. And if you can't answer that yourself, no amount of explanation will help you understand it. |
FLAG |
By TP in SLC
Mar 14, 2009
| Elijah Flenner wrote: However, I do not believe that climbing is important in the grand scheme of things. The economy, wars, global poverty are important, but climbing is not.
Well said. Hard to instill that thought process on people who think that climbing = life. |
FLAG |
By Wehling
From Larkspur, CO
Mar 14, 2009
| Elijah Flenner wrote: If the presence of bolts does not detract from your experience, then you may not understand why it does ruin the climb for others. However, it should just be understood that it does, so lets not ruin climbing for a large number of climbers by bolting everything.
I think this was the best post in the whole thread. Even if you/we/I don't understand doesn't change how it affects another person. I think one of the best parts of climbing for the masses is the variety, there is almost a perfect climb for everybody, trad, aid, sport or mixed. I think the bottom line here is the FA established a climb and that should be the way it is. When we FA a line, we can do it the way we wish, we don't need to modify somebody else's to make it fit our enjoyment. |
FLAG |
By Jake D.
Mar 15, 2009
| Wehling wrote: I think this was the best post in the whole thread. Even if you/we/I don't understand doesn't change how it affects another person. I think one of the best parts of climbing for the masses is the variety, there is almost a perfect climb for everybody, trad, aid, sport or mixed. I think the bottom line here is the FA established a climb and that should be the way it is. When we FA a line, we can do it the way we wish, we don't need to modify somebody else's to make it fit our enjoyment.
THIS was my point. It's spawned from multiple threads about sport climbs where folks feel it necessary to butt in with THEIR own "ethics" and view of how climbing "should" be everywhere.. including no bolts anywhere regardless of gear availability. (they should go have a kinipshit on aid climbers but they don't)
Let sport climbing exist where the sport climbs are... let trad climbs exist where trad climbs are and everyone can have a place to climb. |
FLAG |
|
[ Forums > Trad Climbing ]
RSS Feed
