Bold-Old school

Seems like every time I hop on a route first done back in the early half of the last century, I am just amazed at how bold they often are. Go climb any Yosemite multi-pitch, old school "moderate" and you know what I mean. Jump on a old 15.10 and you gotta bring your "A-game" even now. But they didn't have so many of our modern gear.
Which of these routes (in any location) have really impressed you at the boldness of that generation? Any stories you have to attach to the route would be appreciated to...

Coyne Crack in Indian Creek.

Harding's Other Chimney 5.6 at Phantom Spires.

By far the hardest 5.6 I've ever jumped on. There are 5.9's that are way easier that that guy.

Seneca has a few. two come to mind immediately: Gunsight to South Peak, only 5.4 but done first climbed in 1939 and it offers some gnarly exposure.

in 1951 Soler was first climbed (I believe Layton Kor did the first FFA) and its an impressive route with gnarly exposure and a few tricky gear areas (depends on your rack but bad ass especially for 1951).

I love climbing "old school" routes because Im always humbled as I sit at the base with all my modern gear KNOWING that the first ascensionists didnt have nearly what I have. Would I have gone up/put up these routes with just the old school rack available? I dont know...

nice topic.

These old school climbs are an example of grade creep. Grading has gotten soft especially on sport routes. Go climb a 5.4 at the Gunks and it will feel like a 5.8 at many sport crags.

Soler was climbed in '51. Free, by Tony Soler.

Many, many other routes come to mind.

Not that I disagree w/ Brian, but I love that cartoon.

IMHO, I tend to find that there is just no correlation between trad ratings (i.e. Gunks, Yosemite, et al.) and world-wide sport ratings on the YDS.

However, the French rating system seems pretty consistent - for sport climbs at least - (i.e. 7a+ feels pretty much the same wherever I go from Rifle, to Rumney, to Rodellar, etc.). In my little fantasy world, everyone would just accept the difference and go climbing more!

Thus, I have tons of respect for old school routes and climbing history; I just do not think that such ratings have any correlation with contemporary sport routes/bouldering. My mindset is waaaay different racking up for 5.10 at the Gunks versus 5.12b bolts at wherever (but I think both are quite fun!).

ajn

I pray daily to the hobnailed, suspendered gods of old. I worship their 5.8 run out chosspiles protected 1/4 inch anchors and 20 year old tat.

Brian wrote:These old school climbs are an example of grade creep. Grading has gotten soft especially on sport routes. Go climb a 5.4 at the Gunks and it will feel like a 5.8 at many sport crags.

Agreed!

The Thumb, 5.7, in Little Cottonwood Canyon.
Kor-Ingalls, 5.9+++++++++! on Castleton Tower.

Norman Clyde 4th class.

Ninety percent of the climbs at Millbrook.

For one of my contributions to the genre (1964 should be suitably old-school), I offer supertopo.com/tr/The-First-… .

Brian wrote:These old school climbs are an example of grade creep. Grading has gotten soft especially on sport routes. Go climb a 5.4 at the Gunks and it will feel like a 5.8 at many sport crags.

I agree. This might be why the "old guard" assumed 5.9 or 5.10 was the absolute top of the grade system. Some of the really old 5.10's require you to make peace with your maker before starting.
At Tahquitz there are a whole host of really old lines that are rated really "easy" but would get a big bump in ratings if there were done much later in any number of places.
The Trough is only rated 5.0 but I see people sewing it up on lead all the time and struggling on several sections.
Fingertip Traverse is rated 5.3 in all the guidebooks, but the consensus on MP.com is 5.4 (meaning some people thought is was a lot harder but didn't want to be that guy who said 5.6/7)
There are some old "classic" routes that apparently have amazing climbing on them but are so runout that hardly anybody does them today. But they were originally done with hiking boots or tennis shoes on.
Look at the old multi-pitch lines. they almost all have an ow or chimney on them. But they didn't have much wide gear then. Bongs did come out eventually, but for a long time they just didn't fall! Think about the FA of the Lost Arrow Chimney!!! The first "big wall" climb in the country. Tons of hard chimneys on that sucker but they did it back when LA's were the new hot gear. CRAZY!!!
I also watched a video at the Banff Film Festival of a pair of Swiss guys who were going to repeat the classic 1938 route on the Eiger. They planned to use only original gear. Clothes, footwear, pro, ropes, etc...They did make one consession; they used a modern rope after testing an old hemp style rope that snapped at the lowest stress rating during a rope test. I still remember the looks on their faces!
I read a few climbing history books that described the kind of lives the depression era climbers lived. Maybe that's why their climbs were so bold and hard? They learned to do what it takes and not give up. Their bodies were hardened by the manual labor jobs they had. They also ended up with lots of "free" time to live the lifestyle and be climbing bums? Maybe...

I also love that Gunks cartoon even though I never climbed there...

rgold wrote:Ninety percent of the climbs at Millbrook. For one of my contributions to the genre (1964 should be suitably old-school), I offer supertopo.com/tr/The-First-… .

BTW: THIS^^^ was awesome!!!

I just did white maidens walkaway at Tahquitz yesterday. Its rated 5.1 on MP, consensus says 5.4, some guidebooks say 5.3, but after climbing all over so-cal the last two years im gonna say that 70% goes at 5.5, 20% at 5.4 and 10% at 5.6. Im very glad i chose this route for my first at Tahquitz.

Brian wrote:These old school climbs are an example of grade creep. Grading has gotten soft especially on sport routes. Go climb a 5.4 at the Gunks and it will feel like a 5.8 at many sport crags.

Okay, I'll call BS on that one. Grade creep does exist, but I don't think its as bad as some would like to say. My guess is that if you put in a little effort, you could find plenty of examples of old school "classic" routes that don't match the grades of other routes from the same time period. In fact, I would submit that some of the grade creep out there feels that way because there exist old school routes that are complete and utter sandbags (and old crusty tradsters just love to cherry pick those routes to point out why all the new kids can't really climb at all). Just because someone back in the day was an egomaniac doesn't mean that his grade scale is the gold standard.

Besides, we all know that old school route grades don't mean squat, because according to the cool kids at Rifle anything that wasn't put up using sticky knee pads on glassy limestone is just 4th class noobery.

Brian wrote:These old school climbs are an example of grade creep. Grading has gotten soft especially on sport routes. Go climb a 5.4 at the Gunks and it will feel like a 5.8 at many sport crags.

There is a whole world of roofs, fun and hurt in those classic 5.4 three pitch trad routes at the Gunks. I wish every 5.11 spory would back up a generation or two, grab a handful of nuts (no cams!) and go do a day or so of these routes up and down the carriage road at Trapps. Maybe they would then gain that appreciation for the 'old guard' and what went down 50 some years ago at the Gunks. And realize there is a whole lot of fun in grades other than hero routes adding a notch to your sport scorebook. Nothing beats the view from a 2nd pitch belay ledge.

West Face of the Wedge, Humbug Spires, MT
5.9+ R, Jerry and Jim Kanzler 1968

"The initial 120 feet were originally protected by three chickenheads. The bolt was added later after two had broken off. It's there waiting for you too."

This was one of the most committing leads of my life. Delicate and sandy 5.9 smearing. I can't imagine how it was done before modern sticky rubber.

The grades are only soft in your opinions because your all a bunch of pussies too afraid to fall above your gear on a sandbagged 5.7 vs. going to an overbolted sport crag.

jarthur wrote:The grades are only soft in your opinions because your all a bunch of pussies too afraid to fall above your gear on a sandbagged 5.7 vs. going to an overbolted sport crag.

and your point is?

jarthur wrote:The grades are only soft in your opinions because your all a bunch of pussies too afraid to fall above your gear on a sandbagged 5.7 vs. going to an overbolted sport crag.

^^^^^THIS GUY^^^^^ Likes to climb: Sport, Gym climbs

Nuff Said!

Jay Karst wrote: ^^^^^THIS GUY^^^^^ Likes to climb: Sport, Gym climbs Nuff Said!

Does that make his opinion less valid? Is your opinion more valid because you're a gnar gnar trad climber?

....I'm not saying that he had a coherent or valid point, but I find the whole "he only sport climbs so his opinion is less worthy" attitude to be pretty funny.