Do you stick clip? Why or why not?

eli poss wrote: For reasons I don't understand, as the risk increases, so does the reward and sense of accomplishment.

eli poss wrote: I don't like adrenaline.

Not saying those 2 things are necessarily contradictory, but yeah, whatever.

reboot wrote:I'm guessing the stuff you've climbed have a lot less horizontal displacement than modern sport routes

And you'd be guessing entirely wrong.

reboot wrote:Well no shit, with the weight of the rope trying to pull you off the wall & all.

Seriously? Now you're just being plain ignorant. Those 9.1's must really be hard on you TR or lead.

Mark E Dixon wrote: Doing overhanging routes as redpoint leads can be a lot harder than obscure 5.10 rope solos

Doing overhanging routes that you've dogged to death and can finally get up clean - wow, I've always been impressed by that. And again, I wasn't comparing overhanging routes with rope soloing, I was comparing overhanging routes done dogging up bolts vs TR. And that was only responding to another completely ignorant statement.

Priceless:

Stick clips replacing leading

eli poss wrote: In case it isn't obvious, I don't like to fall. I don't like adrenaline.

I don't believe these two things have to go together. I don't like adrenaline (in climbing at least), but I still take lead falls regularly. Maybe it has to do with the situations and terrain that I take falls on.

Healyje wrote: Doing overhanging routes that you've dogged to death and can finally get up clean - wow, I've always been impressed by that. And again, I wasn't comparing overhanging routes with rope soloing, I was comparing overhanging routes done dogging up bolts vs TR. And that was only responding to another completely ignorant statement. Priceless: Stick clips replacing leading www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/2842316/Stick-clips-replacing-leading

Do you live in some parallel universe where top ropers never hang on the rope?

The same alternate reality where 40,000 people get dropped by grigris annually?

Some stuff you seem to know, but then you go off on these totally wacko, "climbers today are all screwed up and ruining the world" tangents that make no sense.

Is there some climbing media equivalent of talk radio that's inflaming intolerance and paranoia?

Besides Supertopo, I mean.

reboot wrote:I'm guessing the stuff you've climbed have a lot less horizontal displacement than modern sport routes

Healyje wrote: And you'd be guessing entirely wrong.

Can you safely toprope overhanging climbs? Well the real answer is "it depends" and quantifying objective standards for when you can or can't in an online forum is pointless because there are so many variables.

Healyje, I'm going to have to agree with Reboot here. Your stubbornness and reluctance to explore new disciplines of climbing as the sport has changed has limited your personal climbing experience and makes your opinion regarding some of these subsets of climbing irrelevant. You have a HUGE amount of climbing experience, but self admittedly very minimal experience on modern sport routes. Travel to Rumney or the Red River Gorge and you will find plenty of 5.11s and up that could result in injury if a climber was to fall top roping low, or sometimes even halfway up a route. A lot of these routes are considerably steeper than similarly rated climbs of the 70s. Yes, many hard routes put up in the 70s have overhangs or roofs, but in general they don't compare to some of the terrain that has been made leadable with modern sport climbing. I'm not trying to put down you or the routes you climbed (heck I've seen 5.13 sport climbers get shut down on 5.11s that were put up in the 70s), just trying to clarify certain aspects of the discussion.

Healyje wrote: And you'd be guessing entirely wrong. Seriously? Now you're just being plain ignorant.

You know what, this is the digital age. So, if you think I guessed wrong, show me a couple photos of you TRing one of your very overhung routes & better yet, make a video of you pitching off the first 15 ft of it & then we can be convinced it's safe.

Healyje wrote: Those 9.1's must really be hard on you TR or lead.

TRing (directly off the anchor)& leading a very overhung route pulls completely differently. One pulls you away from the wall (really messes w/ balance, especially lower down on the route), the other inline with the route (& is probably less of a burden than forgetting to take a dump first).

Anyone who had an RC.com account prior to 2008 remembers Healyje's constant spewing about how his TR's were in fact dangerous and that is why you should respect them over a lead. It's funny that he is disputing that now.

I have no interest in digging through the dregs of the failed state of rc but maybe someone else is willing.

Mark E Dixon wrote: Do you live in some parallel universe where top ropers never hang on the rope?

You can certainly hang on a top rope, but it's not going to do much for you on an overhang unless you just like the view.

will ar wrote:Your stubbornness and reluctance to explore new disciplines of climbing as the sport has changed has limited your personal climbing experience and makes your opinion regarding some of these subsets of climbing irrelevant.

I'm not sure what other new 'disciplines' of climbing there are other than sport climbing and I don't find there to be anything 'new' about sport climbing that we weren't doing in the mid-70s other than the bolts, longer routes of the same, and routes harder than 5.13.

will ar wrote:Yes, many hard routes put up in the 70s have overhangs or roofs, but in general they don't compare to some of the terrain that has been made leadable with modern sport climbing.

We came up in a place that didn't allow bolts and we were LNT so wouldn't have used them regardless. But the climbing? We were doing overhanging 11-13s in the mid-70s. There is nothing about 'modern' sport climbing that is particularly modern except the bolt spacing. 'Modern techniques'? Yeah, we were doing the gamut of heel/toe hooking, knee bars, no-hand hangs in spades at the time.

will ar wrote:has been made leadable with modern sport climbing.

Leadable in a faux-clipping sort of way I don't find either interesting or particularly satisfying. When I want to lead it's on gear; if I want to focus on movement and difficulty I much prefer dispensing with the clipping and be free to just move.

reboot wrote:Show me a couple photos of you TRing one of your very overhung routes & better yet, make a video of you pitching off the first 15 ft of it & then we can be convinced it's safe.

Se below.

reboot wrote:TRing (directly off the anchor)& leading a very overhung route pulls completely differently. One pulls you away from the wall (really messes w/ balance, especially lower down on the route), the other inline with the route (& is probably less of a burden than forgetting to take a dump first).

It's inconsequential at best.

highaltitudeflatulentexpulsion wrote:Anyone who had an RC.com account prior to 2008 remembers Healyje's constant spewing about how his TR's were in fact dangerous and that is why you should respect them over a lead. It's funny that he is disputing that now.

Two of them were, none of the rest were at all. And the 'spew' was only ever in the opposite context, responding to those dismissing top roping compared to sport climbing. Here are those two:

Fear Of Flying

Fiddler On The Roof

Healyje wrote:Priceless: Stick clips replacing leading

I'm surprised they didn't just use a ladder to do the entire climb.

Healyje wrote:There is nothing about 'modern' sport climbing that is particularly modern except the bolt spacing.

Nice!

Nathanael wrote: Yea damn kids these days climbing dogging their way up shit on bolts. They should take REAL toprope whippers like I did back in the day. vimeo.com/55184231 I want to see Ashima taking out trees on each attempt.

Incredibile climb, txs for sharing...

Healyje wrote: Two of them were, Here are those two: Fear Of Flying

So that's what, 15-20 ft of overhang over the entire route? If this was a full length (100ft) pitch, it'd be about 10 degree overhung, not really very overhanging by modern sport climbing standard.

Healyje I take it you used to climb with Thurmond as he said he was a big proponent of the pile of leaves crash pad back in the good ol' days haha

And why did this turn into a top rope is more dangerous than sport thread? I feel like a lot of what healyje was taken out of context. Some of you are startinging to act like ex-girlfriends and bring up shit out of context from the past.

So let's get down to it and start arguing again about whether people that use stick clips are pussys!! Or if you don't you have an ego problem trying to be. A hard man and get the lady's to see you clipping that bolt on your favorite 5.8 15feet of the deck before you sprain your ankle.

Alex's zeobastions what is your opinion on this condition?

Someone will stick clipped, Someone will not, so both will climb it, where the damn difference?

Sam Spuds wrote:So let's get down to it and start arguing again about whether people that use stick clips are pussys!! Or if you don't you have an ego problem trying to be.

There are a few common things in these stick-clip threads that I still don't understand:

1)Why does anyone care if someone uses a stick clip? This isn't an ethical issue - it's one of style. Someone else using a stick doesn't affect *your* climbing, either on the same route or on your project. (But see my last point below.)

2)Why do some folks insist on arguing that you should or should not use a stick?

3)I get that not all climbers fully understand the intention of high first bolts and the FAist's expectation that climbers will use a stick on those routes. What I don't get is the follow-up argument that somehow it's wrong.

The only thing I have a real problem with is when there's a leader on a route near me who refuses to use a stick on a high first bolt ('cause it's somehow demeaning or whatever), craters, and then turns my climbing day into rescue assistance.

Nine pages is a little excessive for stuck clips don't ya think haha even though 95 percent of people are agreeing with each other it keeps going!

reboot wrote: You know what, this is the digital age. So, if you think I guessed wrong, show me a couple photos of you TRing one of your very overhung routes & better yet, make a video of you pitching off the first 15 ft of it & then we can be convinced it's safe.

Well Healyje, what say you?

I think ondra should just top rop his problems

youtube.com/watch?v=qA8Bjp4…

vimeo.com/68083454

I wont respect ondra until he climbs change, rather than just dogging his way up it, as Healyje said, not being able to do overhanging routes on top rope is utter nonsense.

Yup, nothing "modern" here. Same old shit, I'd TR it any day.

Given that I have no sponsors to disappoint, the bolts are already there, and I'm not healyje, I stick clip with reckless abandon.

I will readily concede that bolting a line is a concession that I cannot climb it any other way. Further concessions are superfluous, and only material to hierarcherize the also-rans.

Seriously, if you're not sponsored and you're not further damaging the rock, who gives a shit?

that guy named seb wrote:I think ondra should just top rop his problems. I wont respect ondra until he climbs change, rather than just dogging his way up it, as Healyje said, not being able to do overhanging routes on top rope is utter nonsense.

Gotta love you guys and your replays. I never said anyone should top rope overhangs, I merely corrected the nonsense assertion they can't be done safely on TR. Are there some that can't? Sure, but most can. It's that assertion that's utter nonsense, but hey, I know it's a stretch to keep it all straight.

reboot wrote: So that's what, 15-20 ft of overhang over the entire route? If this was a full length (100ft) pitch, it'd be about 10 degree overhung, not really very overhanging by modern sport climbing standard.

It’s hard to tell from the photo and hard to distinguish the route’s line from the formation behind it, but there’s more of the route below the picture and over all it’s overhung thirty five or so feet. The other route is probably more like fifty feet.

Sam Spuds wrote:Healyje I take it you used to climb with Thurmond as he said he was a big proponent of the pile of leaves crash pad back in the good ol' days haha

Sam, you don't say! Thurmond, that bastard, clearly just another old, has-been, lowland, potato-farming pussy who doesn't get out enough.

Sam Spuds wrote:Alex's zeobastions what is your opinion on this condition?

Alex often does have the best read on things…

reboot wrote: You know what, this is the digital age. So, if you think I guessed wrong, show me a couple photos of you TRing one of your very overhung routes & better yet, make a video of you pitching off the first 15 ft of it & then we can be convinced it's safe.

Bill Kirby wrote:Well Healyje, what say you?

I did post up the two that are dangerous. FoF has one broken back chalked up to it and everyone who did FotR took a 23 footer onto their back on hard ground sans pads - no one ever took that fall more than once. None of the others were in any way unsafe to TR, just much harder.

Nathanael wrote: Yup, nothing "modern" here. Same old shit, I'd TR it any day.

Yeah, nothing new there, we were climbing out of shallow caves bitd, but doing it in a place where bolting wasn't allowed and we wouldn't have regardless so those lines stopped above the entrance in a lot of case, in others they ended with some fairly highball bouldering. And of course in this world of yours the exception is clearly the norm both for the rock and the people who get on it.