How do probems get their gradings?

Wilson On The Drums wrote:I have always understood and been told that V0 starts in the 5.10 range and like others have said this has been the way for many years. I also have been able to follow the guidelines of V2/V3 in the 11 range with V5 clocking in around 12a. What I haven't been able to understand is how the link up of hard problems equates to much harder grades like a V9 boulder problem with a V11 crux clocks in at V13 or something like that... I guess is has to do with the human limit of holds we can grab and that link ups with maybe one or two extreme moves gets the V13 and on ratings, but this would never be if you linked 3 V0s together, that would just be sustained V0. There's always room for interpretation and improvement but when I start to see guide books with short 5.9 routes that people sometimes boulder and give V1 or V2 grades, come on people let's get real.

I agree with this, I do feel the V2-V5 goes along nicely with the designated YDS grade from what I have experienced but beyond that I don't have much input, beyond my level.

Micah Klesick wrote: Your theory is so far off that if I hadn't visited your page and saw actual pictures of boulders that look super easy with your grades on them, I'd think you were trolling. Exactly. A boulder problem isn't a boulder problem unless it's harder. VB was pretty much created by gyms so they could put up problems beginners could do. V0 has been a 5.10+ comparison since the scale was started. From experience bouldering at many locations, the scale I posted is very much accurate. And yes it makes sense that you need to be an intermediate climber to climb graded boulders. Bouldering is basically doing the hard part of a route, and there isn't enough of a hard part on 5.9s/10- to warrant a bouldering grade for them. In the end, your opinion on how it should work doesn't really matter... It's a standard that's been around for quite a while, and you disagreeing with it doesn't change a thing.

at least I have pictures... thanks so much for your contributions lol

but apparently you boulder V5 but only route 5.10 soo you boulder V0 then right?

oh the irony

Joe L 82 wrote: but apparently you boulder V5 but only route 5.10 soo you boulder V0 then right? oh the irony

That just makes him a (relatively) poor route climber, as most dedicated boulderers are. The bouldering-route conversion at best gives you an idea of relative difficulty/effort required to achieve the respective level. You can certainly specialize one or the other.

A 5.12a doesn't need to have any moves harder than V2 if it's purely endurance based, but no 5.12a should have moves harder than V4 (or whatever the converted bouldering grade is) or it's not graded correctly.

Joe L 82 wrote: at least I have pictures... thanks so much for your contributions lol but apparently you boulder V5 but only route 5.10 soo you boulder V0 then right? oh the irony

Haha you're a crack up. You obviously didn't look at my page very carefully when it comes to contributions, or grade. I can climb up to 5.11d at this point. So about a V3/4. But as anyone that boulders a lot knows, it's easy to start bouldering a couple grades above your route level if you boulder a lot.

The way problems should get graded is, a true badass that climbs 5.13-5.15 puts up the route or boulder problem. They then subtract at least a few grades off the true grade, so that it will be funny to watch some poor slobs struggling on it while they suddenly appear and send effortlessly in tennis shoes, possibly free solo.

Micah Klesick wrote: Haha you're a crack up. You obviously didn't look at my page very carefully when it comes to contributions, or grade. I can climb up to 5.11d at this point. So about a V3/4. But as anyone that boulders a lot knows, it's easy to start bouldering a couple grades above your route level if you boulder a lot.

You put up 4 or 5 areas and there are literally 2 pictures between all of them and your descriptions are not any better. I think one problem you put up has a picture linked to it... 1

Besides I never knew you were uber pro and could determine problem grades by looking at pictures of stone on the other side of the country that you have never been on in your entire life.

So maybe my interpretation of V0 is off, who the hell cares other than apparently you?

I grade the problems I discover based on how I feel at that time, I also reserve the right to change that grade after I experience other problems and or climbs and often leave the grade open. V2 ish? 3ish? IDFK? it's an intermediate problem I didn't have to work all that hard for.
I am also open to other climbers opinions but unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you look at it I live in an area that has boulders all over the place and no one around to climb them. I could post brand new untouched problems all day everyday for a year and not come close to exhausting the local rock. I typically solo everywhere I go because my main partners don't live here and are not around much and since I have responsibilities I try to keep the problems on the safe side as if something happened no one would ever find me.

I haven't seen the inside of a gym in 2 years, I haven't sent a boulder that I haven't had to clean off for the first time in it's existence since I moved to where I am at. Sorry I don't live in flavor of the week bouldering central where opinions are like *** holes, everyone got one and they all stink.

go clutch your precious grade scale and use it as a crutch, ill be busy discovering new problems and having a good time on them all no matter the grade.

Good day.

I'd advise, use the ratings as guides, not rules.

Judging boulder problems has never been an real issue. You get shut down bouldering, you pack up your pad and walk away. Get shut down on that crux 3rd pitch, escape is far more complicated.

Although we all end up grading stuff based on "what it feels like", I think we should when possible remember that any free climbing grade is meant to mean: an ordered list of the fraction of climbers that can climb the problem/route.

Hence if all your friends can climb problem "a" and it is V4 and few can climb problem "b" which is V2, there might be an issue,

This is some good stuff!

I'm not a strong climber and stick to easy stuff - I'm old and new to trad climbing.

I'm not outdoors to give a hoot what others are bragging about, as far as, what grade so-and-so can climb - good for whoever.

The grading scale is really different for everyone. I'm 6'4" with long ass arms and legs. I have a good reach. Does this change my perspective of how hard a route is compared to someone who is 5'7" reaching for that far hold at the crux? It is all relative to the person climbing at that time and under whatever conditions that day holds.

I climb to enjoy being outdoors and doing something that excites me. Nothing more.

My grade scale is... walk up to it, look at it, try it. If I don't get it the first time then this is a hard climb. Try it again, and again if need be.

Although, checking the grade scale can keep me from doing a very long approach to something I know is over my head at the momment, so to speak.

V0... schmeeo, 5.10... try again? Another good scale is the pile of beer cans at the end of the day drinking the cuts and bruises to numbness, and telling stories of the wasp nest you almost grabbed deep in that off-width.

Good times, good times! :)

Joe L 82 wrote:a v0 = a 5.10? how is that even possible and how does it make sense. JMO

Just because you disagree with a scale doesn't mean you get to re invent it.

Anyway it's far less ridiculous than the YDS - just try explaning that one to a non climber. And for that matter, I was always kind of irked that metric tire sizes have both inches and millimeters.

Joe L 82 wrote:a v0 = a 5.10? how is that even possible and how does it make sense. V0 is basically not even on the V scale meaning skill required & difficulty = 0 = non existent.

Grades don't make sense, but they make a lot more sense when you add historical perspective the discussion. Climbing with "skill required & difficulty = 0" was never intended to be part of the V-system.

"Sherman said the V-scale was mostly a half-joking “ego yardstick” he and friends used to compare their Hueco feats ...the original V1 was Bob Murray’s Center El Murray (today V6); the original V2 was Mike Head’s Mushroom Roof (today V8); and two benchmark V3s were Nachoman and Sex after Death(today V9s)."
climbing.com/climber/10-thi…

Just as Sherman thought Gill's system was lacking so made up his own, maybe you should come up with your own scale.... it might catch on.

interesting stuff. I think consensus on grades is a good thing, it only makes sense as every climber has different strengths and weakness, let the majority rule. As i mentioned unfortunately not many people are hitting up the rocks i climb so consensus is next to impossible.

I have often thought my V1 grades ranged quite a bit from to high to on par but this makes sense with my warped perception of V0 :) perhaps it's my scientific mindset ;)

This all being said, the best i could do was spend some time watching video's of well documented problems from various areas here and there online to try and see where my thoughts on grades stood. I watched lots of v0-v6 problems which is not the same as getting on the rocks but the best i could do at this time. By paying close attention to the holds and the skill of the climbers making the moves i feel like i was able to get a good idea to how the problem would send. It pretty much backed up much of what i originally had thought. I feel my V2-V5 grades that i hand out would be on par with what i see in the videos and you would find at well documented areas. And if anything my assigned V4 grades are probably a little soft more V4+ V5- I watched several V4 problems get sent very sloppy that i for sure would have graded V3

So my V1 grades are a bit high to on par, meh... could be worse, kill me for it, a few of the problems i consider V1 could be down graded to V0 other than that i am at least in the ball park it would seem.

I think there's a lot to be said for the idea that gyms play a part in inflating the scale. Gyms want never-climbed-before folks to be able to get up problems, even if those problems are no more difficult than climbing a particularly shitty ladder. They want these problems to have ratings, hence things like VB or whatever.

I climb in Japan, where bouldering problems are described using the dankyuu system, the same thing Japan uses for grading lots of things. The baseline is 1kyu, which is equivalent to a V4-V5. As the number goes up from there it gets easier- the easiest proper boulder problems sit somewhere around 6kyu, but the gym I go to has beginner problems on the wall rated up to 9kyu or so. At the harder end, after 1kyu you have 1dan, and difficulty increases with the dan number. V10 is something like 3dan. I like the system because it's open-ended on both sides.

Not sure where you live in PA (I'm in the Pittsburgh area) but take a trip to the more established areas if you can. There are 2, Cooper's Rock, WV which has been around for some time and Coll's Cove which is a newer area not far from Ohiopyle. This will give you a sense of how things of what people think in other places.

Some people will say Coopers is stiff but I think its right where grades should be. With everyone climbing in the gym(which typically grade soft) grades are getting inflated more and more.

Coopers Rock State Forest

Coll's Cove

Jonathon Esack wrote: Some people will say Coopers is stiff but I think its right where grades should be. With everyone climbing in the gym(which typically grade soft) grades are getting inflated more and more. Coopers Rock State Forest Coll's Cove

I feel like every time I ask about a bouldering area, I get a dramatic description of how stiff the grades are. Joshua Tree? Oooh that's stiff. Cooper's rock? Very stiff grades. Stoney Point - stiff. Bishop - so hard. HP40? You gotta work for the grade there! I think the only bouldering area where people don't spray about how stiff the grades are is LRC!

Jonathon Esack wrote:Joe L 82 Not sure where you live in PA (I'm in the Pittsburgh area) but take a trip to the more established areas if you can. There are 2, Cooper's Rock, WV which has been around for some time and Coll's Cove which is a newer area not far from Ohiopyle. This will give you a sense of how things of what people think in other places. Some people will say Coopers is stiff but I think its right where grades should be. With everyone climbing in the gym(which typically grade soft) grades are getting inflated more and more. Coopers Rock State Forest Coll's Cove

Coll's Cove is on my list of things to hit up before late fall sets in.

Shoot me a message if you ever plan on heading there on say a Saturday for some bouldering, would be nice to have someone familiar with the area to pal around with.

Cocoapuffs 1000 wrote: I feel like every time I ask about a bouldering area, I get a dramatic description of how stiff the grades are. Joshua Tree? Oooh that's stiff. Cooper's rock? Very stiff grades. Stoney Point - stiff. Bishop - so hard. HP40? You gotta work for the grade there! I think the only bouldering area where people don't spray about how stiff the grades are is LRC!

Definitely, but what people need to realize is these areas aren't stiff, they are benchmarks in which new areas/problems should be based off. They seem "stiff" b/c newer areas are watered down more and more. Also when determining grades egos get in the way so instead or a solid v4 we get all these soft "v5-6's" (i know it goes the other way too).

In the end its all about having fun and they shouldn't matter but it is fun being able to measure your personal progress. They will never be consistent. Some days you'll go home feeling like superman and others you'll be humbled.

Cocoapuffs 1000 wrote: I feel like every time I ask about a bouldering area, I get a dramatic description of how stiff the grades are. Joshua Tree? Oooh that's stiff. Cooper's rock? Very stiff grades. Stoney Point - stiff. Bishop - so hard. HP40? You gotta work for the grade there! I think the only bouldering area where people don't spray about how stiff the grades are is LRC!

The grades are stiff compared to...what? I think anywhere you aren't used to is going to feel hard. In bishop for example the buttermilks tend to be more crimpy/technical than a lot of places so if you aren't used to that yeah it's going to seem heinous. On the flip side I'm sure the slopers at HP40 would feel impossible to someone like me who spends all their time prancing around on buttermilks crimp fests.

Ryan Watts wrote: The grades are stiff compared to...what? I think anywhere you aren't used to is going to feel hard. In bishop for example the buttermilks tend to be more crimpy/technical than a lot of places so if you aren't used to that yeah it's going to seem heinous. On the flip side I'm sure the slopers at HP40 would feel impossible to someone like me who spends all their time prancing around on buttermilks crimp fests.

Good point!!!

While you feel like grades are being inflated on the lower end of the scale, grades at the upper end are being compressed. I think the culprit in both cases is ego. Weaker people want to feel strong, so they tend to take a higher grade. Strong people want to make others feel weak so they sandbag the grade so people will struggle.

It's all nonsense really. The boulder is as hard as it is. Attaching a number to it does not change anything. Just climb whatever you want to climb and if you feel like you want to give your opinion on the grade, just be honest.

My personal grading system:

1: I did it

2: I tried it and haven't done it

3: I haven't tried it