Step one: admit you have a problem.

Would as many sub-par routes be going up if there was no intard-web to spray about 'em on?

I don't think being able to "spray" about putting up new routes would be sufficient motivation to go through the effort. I think the feeling of "creating" a route by putting bolts in the rock and having it as "My FA" may, however, be sufficient to motivate many consumers. Perhaps I just get a little nervous as more of our limited resource is consumed in a similar style. It's quick and easy to establish a sport crag. It's takes a little more time to pick out an "almost there" naturally protected line. I'm not talking about BOLTS or sport climbing, I'm talking about The Fever.

Some poorer routes go up (trad) as a result of curiosity, and since done ground up, you don't know how it will be until you get it done.

Rock Canyon.......I have over time posted about the routes in that area. In my mind, that area is being over developed with some poor quality climbs due to this "I have this many FA's" mentality. Some of the routes going up there are poor quality, and in my limited climbing there over the last few years, I have run into more than one climb that I have protected using the equipment on my belt. To a lesser extent, I have even run into routes I did nearly a decade ago with my rack, now those lines have bolts on them.

I have strong ethics about bolting, do not take what I say to seriously. Rock Canyon used to be home court for me until I discovered Zion and the towers in the desert. When I go back, I do my best to keep my mouth shut, guess I should here to. My apologies for going a little off topic, but this canyon is not of the high quality it used to be. I think, in part, due to the "I got an FA" attitude.

Rob Schwarzmann

I had a similar pair of glasses and haircut in 1969...now you have the Marine look. Ian, are you brushing with Crest? Up and down? Flossing adequately? Quality may dissipate somewhat as a climbing area gets saturated.

Ian N. wrote:Would as many sub-par routes be going up if there was no intard-web to spray about 'em on?

I wonder what qualifies a route as "subpar"?

I know for me the new routes I have been involved with was more about the discovery and creation than the ability to "spray". I don't think Bob Gaines was just looking to brag when he put out the new "Tahquitz and Suicide" guidebook a few years ago. Nearly all the new routes included were his.
If we discover something fun we usually want others to be able to enjoy it also.

I have removed several routes that ended up being crap and I would not recommend anyone else do them which is why they they are not listed(it IS hard to tell before you start. But it can go both ways: Squaw Peak South Face was generally considered to have way too much junk rock to be worth the effort, but we have found out that it is the exact opposite).

I do agree with the point that bolting old trad lines is a problem. I have seen several routes I did on gear some time ago get bolted later on. But without publishing of the route information, is it a surprise that some of these do eventually get bolted?

I do agree that there needs to be some restraint. But where do you draw that line without active communication (which the web enables to a greater degree)? I'm just not sure there is a good answer...

Rock Canyon seems to be the object of much critizism but I say, don't bash it until you try it. The VAST majority of the new lines are quite good and being established by the Knight clan. The head of which, Jim, is about as badass as any of us can only dream about. And the others usually will discuss their routes only if someone asks. Have you noticed that most (maybe all) of Andy's new lines are posted by someone else? Those who feel that a large number of these new lines are "subpar" are in a TINY minority.

One day...
when I grow up to be a real climber...
I'll be psyched enough put my fa's in a photo spread in climbing magazine.

Just messin with you Ian. (me grinning)

Seriously though, i offer the photocopy guide GregM and co did as contrast. They put up loads and loads of variable quality stuff - some really fun and some not (just like everyone else who does new routes). And they were not happy to see them get thrown up on the internet. Maybe that's why he gives such brief descriptions of them.

I want to understand your point. Are you saying that people should put up fewer routes or only naturally protected routes? Or that they shouldn't post them in the internet? OR, that they should wait a long time before posting?

Web or no web, routes of all qualities have been put up since the beginning of climbing. Just depends on how much the ego needs to be stroked as to how much the first ascenscionist beats his/her own chest about said new route. More climbers now, including the web helps with "so called spraying" about them. I thought it was only cats that sprayed. And I guess I'm a little curious, "'Step one: admit you have a problem'". So I'm curious, what kind of problem does people have that they need to admit? LOL... A two day old post with me being the ninth person to chime in, wow, what a hot topic... next please, lol....

Juan

What may be subpar for one, may be something awesome and a great accomplishment for another. I think it's a question of not being too critical: someone may think the same as your routes!!

Juan

Okay, 10th response, time to move on!!!

Ian N. wrote:Would as many sub-par routes be going up if there was no intard-web to spray about 'em on?

Yes.

People need hobby's. Some people's cranks are turned by origami or scrapbooking. Some by grid bolting or lovely delicious offwidths.

If you were climbing when your sunglasses were first popular, you would have a better selection of FA trad routes to pick from.

If you don't want folks to know about it, then just go climbing and stop worrying about if its an FA or not. I can't understand those who put up a bunch of bolted routes and not want people to know about it (unless they are trying to make a dime off a guidebook in the process). And I do appreciate first ascensionists for the work it takes and the money they invest if it is bolted.

PT

Ian N. wrote:Would as many sub-par routes be going up if there was no intard-web to spray about 'em on?

Troll.....

Plus, are those Vaurnet sunglasses? Do you have any more?

Even if a FA is a bomb, posting it on the internet has value. That way, others know not to bother. Case in point, I don't know anyone that has bothered to climb "Deep Dark Crack" in BCC, probably because the guidebooks say not to bother.

Hi my mane is Mike White and I am a Boltaholich.
I have a problem but it is not Grid Bolting.

I think that most climbs, whether 'sub-par' or not have a certain value, and it all depends on the person climbing and/or bolting them. If someone found something they enjoyed and they want other people to be able to climb it, I think that's a good thing. I think as long as people are bolting climbs that are somehow worth doing and not just bolting for the hell of it, why not?