Why are there so few 12+ routes on Mt. Lemmon?

So why aren't there more 12+ routes on Mt. Lemmon??

But I digress......

I don't see how the climbing grades can even be differentiated the way they are. Seems like to me anything beyond 5.10 is 5.hard. I kept waiting to see some kind of standard for what a particular grade is. When I found out that it's more or less purely subjective, I was floored. But then, I'm an analytical person down to my very core.

What is the difference between 5.12, 5.12+(d), and 5.13-(a)? Seriously, how can you tell which is which?

I want to thank all of the non sensical posters for helping me to waste an hour of time at work...

And huge props to the guys out there throwing up new lines for everyone!

Brigette wrote:I don't see how the climbing grades can even be differentiated the way they are. Seems like to me anything beyond 5.10 is 5.hard. I kept waiting to see some kind of standard for what a particular grade is. When I found out that it's more or less purely subjective, I was floored. But then, I'm an analytical person down to my very core. What is the difference between 5.12, 5.12+(d), and 5.13-(a)? Seriously, how can you tell which is which?

It's always kinda strange until you hit that next level. Then the differentiation makes more sense. For example, I've made it up some 12's, and struggled up a few 12+'s, but haven't even come close to finishing any 13's. (thank god for bail beaners and fixed draws!) Overall, the grades give you an idea of what the route is that you're hopping on...

But classic routes should typically determine what is typical for a grade in most areas... And if you want to go technical about it I think 8a.nu has some rules on who can grade what (based on height, reach, body fat, etc)... but honestly wtfc?

I was trying to make a joke by using the word posse. Sorry to all who think they are going to get mugged by some climbers in a wild climbing posse. My bad, forgot it was the internet.

As for the radio . . . that is why there are so few 12+'s on the mountain.

Eddie Brown wrote: It's always kinda strange until you hit that next level. Then the differentiation makes more sense. For example, I've made it up some 12's, and struggled up a few 12+'s, but haven't even come close to finishing any 13's. (thank god for bail beaners and fixed draws!) Overall, the grades give you an idea of what the route is that you're hopping on... But classic routes should typically determine what is typical for a grade in most areas... And if you want to go technical about it I think 8a.nu has some rules on who can grade what (based on height, reach, body fat, etc)... but honestly wtfc?

Thanks for this post, I figured the grades are to keep people safe though I didn't give a ton of thought to how they're graded. I've been on 7s that felt harder than 9s and so on so I guess it may also have something to do with climbing types and styles too. Also, I'm guessing build comes into play, a man may be better on an overhung 11 with jugs than a vertical wall with more technical holds and the revers may be true for a woman.

I think ideally having a consensus like you find on MP is a wise idea and with so few people climbing into the 12s there may be a bigger discrepancy there as you need some 5.14 climbers to come in and say no that's more 5.12+ than 5.13.

Like I said I always see it as a safety issue to keep people of routes above their skill level. I personally see no difference between a 5.12 and a 5.15, as they both feel exactly the same to me.

Adam Block wrote: Thanks for this post, I figured the grades are to keep people safe though I didn't give a ton of thought to how they're graded. I've been on 7s that felt harder than 9s and so on so I guess it may also have something to do with climbing types and styles too. Also, I'm guessing build comes into play, a man may be better on an overhung 11 with jugs than a vertical wall with more technical holds and the revers may be true for a woman. I think ideally having a consensus like you find on MP is a wise idea and with so few people climbing into the 12s there may be a bigger discrepancy there as you need some 5.14 climbers to come in and say no that's more 5.12+ than 5.13. Like I said I always see it as a safety issue to keep people of routes above their skill level. I personally see no difference between a 5.12 and a 5.15, as they both feel exactly the same to me.

If you're using numbers you see in a guidebook (or this site or wherever) as a part of your climbing safety system, you're likely doing something wrong.

There's an exception to every rule and all that, but grades really are mostly useful for ego stroking/busting, not for safety. They're also useful for saving time by helping you pick out objectives of a desired level of difficulty. Sometimes that can be accomplished just by looking at the climb, in which case we really have to ask what purpose the grade serves, if any.

pfwein wrote: If you're using numbers you see in a guidebook (or this site or wherever) as a part of your climbing safety system, you're likely doing something wrong. There's an exception to every rule and all that, but grades really are mostly useful for ego stroking/busting, not for safety. They're also useful for saving time by helping you pick out objectives of a desired level of difficulty. Sometimes that can be accomplished just by looking at the climb, in which case we really have to ask what purpose the grade serves, if any.

Really? Well, if not there for safety reason then maybe to cut down on bail-a-biner usage? I can't always look up a route and know what the crux is, I just figured the ratings were there so people knew what they're getting into (e.g. safety) before finding themselves ran out, 40 feet up and trying to debate what to do as a 5.9 climber on a 5.11.

Derek Anderson wrote: EFR is no mountain God, its not his mountain... Boodge You were talking to my little brother, so get your facts straight. Want to adress me with something speak in person. I"ll say what I have to say right to your face. Guideline #1 don't be a jerk, and you call me a douchebag? By the way, I'm not scared of this big community you guys told me to be scared of. I"m not worried about how many climbers are in your group or how many of you there are. The fact is that you think your better than other people when your not a step ahead of anyone else. I have been climbing for 4 months and sent routes that have taken you years to complete. I saw you working sentenced , you had to hang at the first clip... I know how to tie a figure 8 you obviously are to hard headed to understand a joke... And I like my music, so does my group... and if you have something to say about it, tell me on the crag when I"M in your face, not on the internet. I don't regret the post I made, in fact I"m happy that it showed the true colors of this community. I'll keep having fun at the crag and I would like to see you guys try and stop me :) I'm not scared of your climbing posse haha , I hate posses Jealousy is a stinky cologne

(tilting head, appears confused)

Wow, did someone put LSD in my drink at work today. It sure feels like I have walked into another reality. I thought this thread had run it's course yesterday. Ha Ha Ha! I am dumbfounded and my jaw has been on the keyboard for the last 15 minutes of reading.

Thanks Joe for your articulate response. I think that sums it up pretty well.

"Derek - no offense man, but this is what happened. EFR started a discussion about grades. Everyone who posted had an implicit understanding that grades are a tool we can use to discuss relative difficulty of a climb, but in the end are meaningless and have little to no impact on why we climb or how much enjoyment we get out of climbing. The reason EFR was asking about 12+ is because during the era many of the sport routes on Lemmon were established, 12+ was nearing the limit of what was being climbed at the time. So many people climbing the harder routes (12+/13-'s) wanted to be a little conservative in their ratings, and would choose to give a climb a slightly lower grade. So many things that might be 12+ were given a lower rating, and we don't have many 12+s on the mountain. EFR was trying to see if people had any opinions on which climbs might fall into this category.

Is this an important discussion? Not really. Is it a valid discussion. Sure, especially on a rock climbing website, for people stuck inside wanting to talk climbing when they can't be outside doing it. No one compared their abilities to anyone else's, and no one implied that being a 5.12+ climber makes you a better person than anyone else. Had the title of the thread been "Why are there so few 12+s on Lemmon and why climbing 12+ makes me awesome", believe me, I would have called EFR or anyone else out on that one."

Thanks Brent! Ha Ha Ha! "And you don't want to be pissing off the EFR FA climbing posse, it's a big group." Yeah Brent and you are in it.! Ha Ha

DEREK. What Joe said is true. Another reason that I posted this thread is that I am constantly updating the guide book on my computer and hope to have a new guide out in 2012. As a result I am doing my best to get the ratings right. By right I mean close. I don't really care if a route is off by a little bit. It is unlikely that anyone will die on a route that is a little easier or harder than the grade listed. I am also curious when an anomoly occurs in the numbers. Other than that I don't really care how hard anyone climbs.

In the future you might try finding out why I would start this thread or PMd me with a question before you posted. "Eric, is it really all about the numbers for you?" As far as the big response you got, welcome to the web.

I still hope to meet you some day as I have seen your contributions and appreciate them. You and Caleb seem like energetic, motivated climbers. Same as everyone who posted here. With luck you and everyone else that got a little worked up will be over it when you bump into each other outside.

Thanks to everyone who said nice things. You all get Christmas presents! Now lets get back to an important topic, like, are sticky rubber knee pads cheating or not?

Brent Silvester wrote:I was trying to make a joke by using the word posse. Sorry to all who think they are going to get mugged by some climbers in a wild climbing posse. My bad, forgot it was the internet. As for the radio . . . that is why there are so few 12+'s on the mountain.

Thanks for trying to get back on topic.

Give it to me Marcy. Ha Ha Ha! Where do you folks find this sh@t?

hahahaha marcy!!

well said, eric. you posted before i could finish my response, but here it is anyway...

derek, just so you know, EFR is respected so much in part because he puts a ton of time into helping other climbers. i have personally learned a lot from him and have grown to respect him very much. moreover, he is funny as hell, he has staggering passion for climbing, and he is one of the most insightful people i've ever met.

You already got a birthday present Geir, no xmas for you!

Eric Rhicard wrote:You already got a birthday present Geir, no xmas for you!

shit! i'm moving my birthday to june!

Wow Dereck I think you are misunderstanding what these folks were talking about. You are a good kid and are starting to learn how to climb sport well. Thats great. They do have a point about putting your own routes up. I believe this is a misunderstanding on your part and you should just say oops Im sorry. Forgiveness is divine. I dont really know any of these folks except Jimbo and I know he is a climber to respect. He has also been very kind to me every time I have been at his home with him and his wife. I dont know these other folks really so I guess you should just be nice. You are learning fast how to hold on and clip bolts. Its all mileage. Remember the best climber is the one who has the most fun. And dont bolt cracks. Thats all, Im sure we can find many easy climbs to climb in Tuscon and Im sure we can all get along. I personally only care when folks put bolts next to natural pro. Other then that I could care less how hard you climb or what you climb. But thats my opinion.I would say with the advent of this sport climbing thing that most people wanting to learn how to climb can do sport or TR the routes without to much risk.

Eric Rhicard wrote:Now lets get back to an important topic, like, are sticky rubber knee pads cheating or not?

What level do you think you would climb at if you couldn't use shoes or chalk?

I think if you can get it naturally like dust or chalk it's fine. Anything after that is aiding in some way though still acceptable to me.

Yesterday I was in a little rush and was going to run up a 5.7 to clean it in my street shoes. I don't think it would have been an issue but I was surprised at how uncomfortable climbing in sneakers was so back down I went to get my climbing shoes.

Adam Block wrote: What level do you think you would climb at if you couldn't use shoes or chalk?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mg5LOLsQGXQ

Bobby Hanson wrote:Video

That's INSANE! For real, caused me to panic for a second and I wasn't even climbing. Why am I a climber with this big of a fear of heights.

It's from The Sharp End, by Peter Mortimer (Sender Films). Recommended.