History of Sport Climbing?

Todd -

"Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds."

Albert Einstein

Tom Hanson wrote:Todd - "Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from weak minds." Albert Einstein

My all-time favorite quote. It sat on my desk for years.

Here is the full quote:

"Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence." - Albert Einstein

I couldnt agree with you more Bob... Its why I said "Lets all just be climbers".

I just thought maybe there was some particular source of his anger. I, for instance, have put up a lot of routes where a section of it (usually the top) has a bit more space between the bolts. I have done this, for example, when the route is 5.12 and the top is 5.10 but steep and safe to fall on. I find it pretty cool when routes are this way as it makes the 5.12 climber stay focused on the trivial stuff as well... and the 5.10 climber is never really on there anyway. I digress. My point was that I would be pissed if someone cam along and added a bolt to the upper part of pitch 4 of Lord of the Thai's. I specifically set it up that way and feel it is part of our climbing culture to climb things the way the first ascentionist intended. That said, I though maybe Healyje could tell me about a few of his traditionally protected routes that have been bolted and thus changed... just thought I'd give him the chance.

Personally, I can't think of a route being changed liek this, that I noticed, in quite a few years. As a matter of fact (as you well remember), we went overboard in t he 80's, but then came to our sense in the 90's (my opinion) and re-accepted traditional climbing techniques as well as sport climbing. I just hoped he would tell me where the "injustices" have taken place lately... cus I don't see it.

And a little history of it for those of you who werent' around at the time. Back in the 80's the bolt wars really got going in Yosemite. The trads hated the hangdogs but couldn't get them to stop "hanging their way up routes" and bolting on rappel "lines that could be climbed through bold style". A couple of traditional climbers decided that since they coulndt do it, maybe the governement could. So, they went to the Park Service and filed a complaint. They screamed that "bolts were being put in on rappel", as this was against the ethic. The parks response was "You guys are using bolts?... lets make rules for ALL OF YOU."

Point is, together we stand, divided we fall.

Sam Lightner, Jr. wrote:A couple of traditional climbers decided that since they coulndt do it, maybe the governement could. So, they went to the Park Service and filed a complaint. They screamed that "bolts were being put in on rappel", as this was against the ethic. The parks response was "You guys are using bolts?... lets make rules for ALL OF YOU." Point is, together we stand, divided we fall.

Well said, Sam.

Joe's comment about brooking only so much incursion sounded like a veiled threat of going to any length in order to get his way - including getting land management involved.

This topic makes a person feel like Britney Spears in a tumble dry cycle.

Bob D'Antonio wrote:...woke up at 5am...drove two plus hours, walked three plus miles with 50 lbs pack and spend the day drilling (on lead) with a heavy bosch, getting our asses (5.12 climbing) handed to us and looking at 30 foot falls with a hot piece of metal ready to impale us if we should slip. Had to rap of...carried all the shit out, hiked back out, curse the whole way and told Richard I'm done and to old (55) to be doing this shit. Richard just called this morning...we are headed back out again this weekend.

inspiring!
:)

Bob,

Your last post really had me laughing. Of course, I can totally relate. It reminds me of back when I was a teenager, climbing with my best pal. We were in the middle of some climb and he looked over at me and said, "We've got a couple of screws loose."
Last Saturday I was toting a double wall rack on the great circle route at Devil's Head (endless bushwacking in search of the great line). By the time we finally got to a crag and got ready to climb, I was bleeding from every appendage, beat up and sore. You'd think a fifty year old would be better suited to taking up golf than humping huge loads up endless approaches to get to a crag where you spend the whole day scaring the shit out of yourself and taxing your muscles so that the next day at work you can barely move without hurting. I wouldn't have it any other way!

Birds. What you got against birds man?

Andy Kowles wrote:Snowboarding revived a stagnant skiing culture and now skiers have a whole new bag of tricks and it's great to watch...but it comes with a cost. I'd say that Ken Cangi's point that sport climbing created/boosted a new generation of gymnastic hard free (trad or sport) climbing is analogous to what snowboarding did for skiing. Edit: Or you could say "did TO skiing/climbing". Either way, it's a trend across society.

No worthwhile pursuit comes without a cost. My attitude is that what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Why should I harbor any animosity toward people for wanting to experience what has offered me such great satisfaction and enjoyment throughout my life? I guess I'm just not that selfish.

And as a lifelong climber and skier, I would say, emphatically, that snowboarding and sport climbing have done for, not to, skiing and climbing - great things, that is.

Okay, now here goes a real hijack, but what in the heck has snowboarding done for skiing?????

Woohoo - I got it - page 14 baby, yeahahhh!!!

Ken Cangi wrote: No worthwhile pursuit comes without a cost...

Just a quick logical note here...

The above statement does not mean that all things that come with a cost are worthwhile...

James M Schroeder wrote: Just a quick logical note here... The above statement does not mean that all things that come with a cost are worthwhile...

That goes without saying, although, in the case of what snowboarding and sport climbing have done "for" skiing and climbing, in general, I believe, as do countless others, that the results have been positive.

Look - It's way too easy to pine for the old ways, because it's comfortable. We become accustomed to what we know, and most like it that way. The problem with that mentality is that it stifles our evolution. I guess I have been fortunate in that I haven't stopped feeling inquisitive about what is possible and what hasn't been done. Consequently, I get very excited about each new generation's developments and contributions.

You can complain about over-development, over-population, globalization, exorbitant fuel prices, too many bolts, not enough bolts, and on and on, but you will only succeed in frustrating yourself, because civilization is going to advance whether you like it or not. Our time on this planet is ephemeral, at best, so my suggestion is to open your eyes and mind and absord as much as you can. Find the fascination in it all so that you don't come to the end of your life regretting all of the energy that you put into complaining about things that you cannot change.

Peace.

Not So Famous Old Dude wrote: ...what in the heck has snowboarding done for skiing?????

If you have to ask, I'm afraid that you won't appreciate the answer.

wider, shorter, more aggresively cut skis.
Why it didni't occur to us before dumfounds me.

oh, and baggy pants.

Ken,

I wasn't picking sides, just pointing out something I thought was important.

I actually rather enjoy sport-climbing, for that matter I enjoy trad-climbing, top-roping, bouldering, ice-climbing, alpine climbing, good old fashioned mountaineering, aid-climbing, and though I haven't ever had the chance to do it, I'm sure I'd enjoy bolted mixed-climbing. Did I miss any genres?

Everybody,

I think this whole argument is a little silly, because both sides have valid points.

Bolted routes are fun, and they're a safe way to work on getting strong, and too really push an individual's physical limits. They do however tend to encourage complacency and a lack of knowledge among people who only sport climb. The fact that sport routes make the "not-dying" part of climbing easier does encourage a greater number of people to climb (which may or may not be bad depending on their attitudes and ethics). The obvious solution here is in the middle. Of course there should be bolted routes, but people who equip those routes should have a healthy respect for the ethics of the areas they're developing, and the climbing community as a whole (past, present and future).

Now is there any chance we can stop this rant before it goes to 15 pages?

James M Schroeder wrote:Now is there any chance we can stop this rant before it goes to 15 pages?

You can't stop it James. It's bigger than you.

Top of page, I hope! So many testy postings!

James M Schroeder wrote:Ken, I wasn't picking sides, just pointing out something I thought was important.

Your point wasn't lost on me, James. My comments weren't directed specifically at you, but rather toward anyone who is getting too wrapped up in the idea preserving a limited way of doing things.

As I remember, the term came into usage as Verdon was being publicized as a free climbing center around '83 or so. They just rap bolted stuff due to the lack of cracks on the excellent rock. Of course we disrespected it at first; but as we realized that we could climb some awesome faces in Eldo and other places it started to grow on people. Referring to the French as "Sport Climbers" was a pejorative, as in the above mentioned bumper sticker. By the way, I saw Edlinger onsight The Guardian the week before the first Snowbird comp, (the one where he crushed all opponents); he made it look casual, then he saw that he had forgotten to take a draw for the anchors, so he downclimbed just as smoothly.

I just ran across this AP story:

Study: World Gets Happier

LiveScience Staff

LiveScience.com Mon Jun 30, 1:16 PM ET

Despite the anxieties of these times, happiness has been on the rise around the world in recent years, a new survey finds.
ADVERTISEMENT

The upbeat outlook is attributed to economic growth in previously poor countries, democratization of others, and rising social tolerance for women and minority groups.

"It's a surprising finding," said University of Michigan political scientist Ronald Inglehart, who headed up the survey. "It's widely believed that it's almost impossible to raise an entire country's happiness level."

Denmark is the happiest nation and Zimbabwe the the most glum, he found. (Zimbabwe's longtime ruler Robert Mugabe was sworn in as president for a sixth term Sunday after a widely discredited runoff in which he was the only candidate. Observers said the runoff was marred by violence and intimidation.)

The United States ranks 16th.

The results of the survey, going back an average of 17 years in 52 countries and involving 350,000 people, will be published in the July 2008 issue of the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science. Researchers have asked the same two questions over the years: "Taking all things together, would you say you are very happy, rather happy, not very happy, not at all happy?" And, "All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days?"

A Happiness Index created from the answers rose in 40 countries between 1981 and 2007, and it fell in the other 12.

Scientists had thought happiness is stable over time when looking at entire societies. "Most previous research suggests that people and nations are stuck on a 'hedonic treadmill,'" Inglehart said. "The belief has been that no matter what happens or what we do, basic happiness levels are stable and don't really change."

So Inglehart's team was surprised that happiness "rose substantially." They speculate reasons for the sunny outlooks include societal shifts in recent decades: Low-income countries such as India and China have experienced unprecedented rates of economic growth; dozens of medium-income countries have democratized; and there has been a sharp rise of gender equality and tolerance of ethnic minorities and gays and lesbians in developed societies.

Previous research has found that happiness is partly inherited and that money doesn't buy much of it.

Yet the new survey finds people of rich countries tend to be happier than those of poor countries. And controlling for economic factors, certain types of societies are much happier than others.

"The results clearly show that the happiest societies are those that allow people the freedom to choose how to live their lives," Inglehart said.

A survey released last week found one reason America doesn't top the list: Baby Boomers are generally miserable compared to other generations. Further, a public opinion poll released by the Pew Research Center in April found that 81 percent of Americans say they believe the country is on the "wrong track." The response is the most negative in the 25 years pollsters have asked the question.

The World Values Surveys, led by Inglehart, was funded by the National Science Foundation, the Swedish and Netherlands Foreign Ministries, and other institutions.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

There is a message here, folks.