Best Climber

My question is...who do you think is/was the best all-around climber of all time? By "all-around", I mean through all mountaineering disciplines.

Then, who would you say is the best climber in each individual discipline?

The disciplines I'm aware of are:
-- Alpine Mountaineering (Alpanism)
-- Ski Mountaineering
-- Rock Climbing
-- Ice Climbing
-- Mixed Climbing

Are there more? Don't some people scale buildings? How about those people that do the 8,000 meter peaks? Would they be considered alpanists or just mountaineers in general?

There's been an awful lot of buzz about Chris Lindner crushing at Woodson lately.

Will Anglin wrote:Tommy Caldwell The Nose Magic Mushroom Flex Luthor ..and he makes V13 look easy

+1

Of the modern climbers, I'd say Dean Potter. He's done hard aid, hard free, hard free solos, mountains, hard bouldering and sport. Especially when you consider his other pursuits, he becomes king of the mountain.

• **Go ahead and throw some tomatoes***

I should say that I haven't been around long enough to know all the greats and I'm sure there are plenty of Non-Americans crushing that we don't really know about. So, I'll just say Dean pops into my head first.

Evan

alpinism....ill throw out Alex Lowe

My vote would be for the sufferman... Mark Twight

Uli Steck has to be near the top for all arounder.

I'll say:

Alpine = Steve House or Marko Prezelj
Rock = Tommy Caldwell (Hands Down)
Ice/Mixed = Will Gadd

Man, I must not have any love for all the old hats!?! (Shoulder Shug)

Alex Honnold. In his short career climbing so far he has stunned the world with some crazy free solos and first ascents. He has the most talent of any climber out there and he also one of the youngest.

Anyone who is actually out climbing instead of discussing it on the internet.

Seriously no one has said Reinhold Messner yet?

First solo ascents of Mount Everest without supplemental oxygen,(proving that, despite many warnings to the contrary, the human body can survive at these alititudes without supplemental oxygen)

First climber to ascend all fourteen "eight-thousanders" (peaks over 8,000 metres above sea level).

First ascent of The Rupal face of Nanga Parbat,

He is the author of at least 63 books, many of which have been translated into other languages.

This man changed the definition of what is possible at altitude.

The question was best all around climber - I guess as good a testing ground as any for that would be North Face, North Twin. That puts my man George Lowe right up there, along with Prezelj and House. I'd probably also include Uli and Jeff Lowe. If we're talking strictly rock, that's a whole new list, but these guys would probably be on it.

Bonatti...although some of the already mentioned modern climbers are good choices (Steve House and Tommy Caldwell are definitely up on the list for me). In my opinion, to be on the list they should be practitioners and developers of something revolutionary. Tommy Caldwell's big wall free climbing is revolutionary, as is House's alpine-style in the Greater Ranges. Dean Potter? Nah...B-grade climber who is good at drawing attention to himself.

Oh, wait, I forgot. Isn't the best climber the one having the most fun?

Aaron M wrote:Oh, wait, I forgot. Isn't the best climber the one having the most fun?

I have always found this saying to be ridiculous. It's crap like this that gives people excuses to not try hard, and allows them to be confortable with mediocrity.

Sorry...off topic I know, and I assume Aaron M is being sarcastic, but I can't help myself anytime I see this phrase.

Coeus wrote: I have always found this saying to be ridiculous. It's crap like this that gives people excuses to not try hard, and allows them to be confortable with mediocrity. Sorry...off topic I know, and I assume Aaron M is being sarcastic, but I can't help myself anytime I see this phrase.

Crazy talk! Apparently with this logic great climbers don't have any fun. I see where you are going but, it just doesn't hold up. Take to climbers that are the best. One's a little bitch about failing, and get's all butt hurt, and pissed. And the other takes it in stride and just enjoys the moment. Both equal talent! Who then would be the best. Well my vote goes to the guy having the most fun. If it is about being the best and nothing more, than your missing something.

Probably not American...

Its surprising that climbers like Alexander Huber and Voytek Kurtyka haven't been mentioned and Dean Porter/Alex Honhold have...

Eric8 wrote:Probably not American... Its surprising that climbers like Alexander Huber and Voytek Kurtyka haven't been mentioned and Dean Porter/Alex Honhold have...

For the record, I have both a Canadian and Slovenian in mine! :-)

Ian F. wrote: Crazy talk! Apparently with this logic great climbers don't have any fun. I see where you are going but, it just doesn't hold up. Take to climbers that are the best. One's a little bitch about failing, and get's all butt hurt, and pissed. And the other takes it in stride and just enjoys the moment. Both equal talent! Who then would be the best. Well my vote goes to the guy having the most fun. If it is about being the best and nothing more, than your missing something.

Not really my point, I am just commenting that some people try to say that being successful at climbing is about how much fun you are having, not if you actually succeed at climbing. My point really is, things worth having (sending routes) is often hard work and is not always fun, yet if you perservere you get a reward greater than fun. Don't get me wrong, I am getting ready to go climbing this afternoon with my girlfriend simply to go have fun, but my addiction to climbing comes from achievement of goals.

There is a reason that most high profile athletes mention "sacrifice" as part of what it takes to be where they are, not "fun".

I think those at the top of any game recognize this concept, ask most successful athletes if they are having fun all the time while practicing their craft. I would bet most of them would tell you that they love their sport, but are not always having fun putting in the hard work it takes to be good at something.

Coeus wrote: I have always found this saying to be ridiculous. It's crap like this that gives people excuses to not try hard, and allows them to be confortable with mediocrity. Sorry...off topic I know, and I assume Aaron M is being sarcastic, but I can't help myself anytime I see this phrase.

Maybe, but isn't it also an attempt to re-ground ourselves from all the seriousness that has become climbing? Where everyone is just grade chasing and not having fun? Ya you might climb 5.13, but it's tough to put down the 5.4 advanced top roper with the sh*teating grin.

I like to remember Alex's words when I get down on myself for failures or get overly serious. If you aren't enjoying yourself at least somewhat at LEAST over beers afterwards, what's the point? Blogging on 8a.nu??? Hell, if one of the best climbers in the world could say that while smiling, sounds like an ok mantra to me!

Coeus wrote:I am just commenting that some people try to say that being successful at climbing is about how much fun you are having, not if you actually succeed at climbing.

Now that this thread is hijacked, what does this mean? So if only climbed a mediocre 5.7, then I'm not successful? NOTE - I did clip the next sentence, taking about hard work and rewards..I totally agree with that, BUT climbing success has nothing to do with a 8a.nu scorecard.

To each there own, but I remember the friends, the environment, teaching others, the learning. THAT makes me successful.

Shoot, as I'll probably never climb that hard anyways, it'd be a bummer to think that hard climbing equates with success.

(I realize you are also emphasizing hard work)