Super Easy Climbing?

Ted Pinson wrote:

Hey!  We Lake people can out-sandbag you softy Gunkers.

Plenty of sand at both!

And the proper collective noun is Gunkies.

Sandbag more to get lower grades! :-)

But in reality, the distribution is similar to a bell curve, with a higher number of routes in the middle of the scale.  There aren't that many 5.14 or higher either.  

OP, your profile says you like sport and TR, and it does not mention trad. So maybe that is your answer and why so many seem incredulous over your post. Yes, there do not seem to be a lot of sport routes under 5.5, but as others are saying, there are lots of trad routes 5.2-5.4, and some are great ones.

I don't think there is anything sandbagged about the lower Gunks grades.  They were in large part established by European climbers (Hans Kraus and Fritz Weissner), who were already well versed in alpine standards.

The contemporary UIAA version of those grades (and their decimal-system) equivalents is

II     5.1,      III   5.3,     IV  5.4,     V   5.6,

and there are a truly vast number of climbs in Europe at UIAA Grade V and below.

The decimal system, almost universally misnamed the Yosemite Decimal System (YDS), began in the 1950's at Tahquitz Rock and had climbs for every decimal value from 5.0 to 5.9, so there were plenty of climbs in those lower grades and they weren't necessarily trivial.

In some ways, Yosemite ruined the lower end of the decimal system, because the nature of the rock there means there's very little of any value or interest below 5.7.  So climbers primarily trained in Yosemite (which would be some of the country's very best), if they haven't climbed in other places with the full range of difficulties, think everything below 5.7 is fourth class. They can't tell the difference between 5.2 and 5.4 because they have minimal experience with each (in spite of the fact that Cathedral Peak is nearby with the answers...).

Devil's Lake is generally sandbagged.  I think this is a reflection of the  inferiority complex that typically infects climbers in areas far from the established centers of climbing.  The natives think they can't possibly be as good as the country's top climbers and so downrate all the local climbs.  When the discrepancies are discovered, the natives become  proud of their out-of-whack grading and take perverse pleasure in perpetuating  it.

In Europe there are a completely ridiculous number of bolted sport routes at Euro grade 4c or less.
One reason is to that many European climbers believe that Family-friendly climbing is _important_, and so many children are outdoors climbing with their sisters + brothers + parents.

Where are the Family climbing areas in USA?

Ken

rgold wrote:

crackatoa wrote:

Those two sentences have to be a joke...you didn't even bother to search MP first???  You're either a really lame Troll or I lost a little faith in humanity..

Edit: MP has over 1000 routes listed below 5.6... and we all know mp covers but  a small fraction 

Nah I'm many things but not a troll. I just wasn't aware you could search MP by grade only. I only know how to search by area. Sorry I am a noob, I know. I live in the state of Hawaii by the way so I was more curious about how common these grades are and how they compare to other grades rather than where too look. Thank you for the info though. 

Robert Michael wrote:

OP, your profile says you like sport and TR, and it does not mention trad. So maybe that is your answer and why so many seem incredulous over your post. Yes, there do not seem to be a lot of sport routes under 5.5, but as others are saying, there are lots of trad routes 5.2-5.4, and some are great ones.

Yup, probably should have mentioned that in the first post. 

20 kN wrote:

It depends on if it's an "old school" rating or if it's using the current rating system. With the current rating system, anything below 5.5 is essentially just 4th class, and guidebooks typically label it as such. With the modem system, below 5.5 is typically just scrambling on slab or something more vertical but extremely ledgy and most climbers would feel fine on it without a rope.

I wasn't aware of that, thank you for explaining. 

rgold wrote:

Ohhhhh yeah. Pete Cleveland has told me more than once that he maintained the Devil's Lake sandbagging so that climbers will view people who've learned there as badasses.

Nobody has called me a badass yet, but I've got plenty of time.

Ted Pinson wrote:

rgold wrote:

In my defense, the grade was consistent the standards of the place at the time (early sixties), a time before we realized how much easier climbs of a given grade were elsewhere.  In fact, given that there were routes which, I think, were undergraded by two whole decimal grades (indeed we originally thought UD was 5.8), the eventual sandbaggery of the route in question is rather mild.

I have climbed plenty of 5.3 / 5.4 routes and maybe I think 1 route rated 5.2. I think most people would consider those routes completely sand bagged though because they think anything below a 5.6 should be something to free solo. 

However I do think the chance of falling on these would be rare if you are placing gear on them... they would scare most climbers to the point they would not want to really free solo. Heck I know plenty of classic 5.7 routes that people would expect to be 5.10s in your average gym.

I personally find doing 500ft+ 5.6-5.8 routes my favorite climbing because I don't have to worry about falling but just get to purely enjoy the climbing. At least for the level I can climb at, practice 5.12s in the gym so i can relax on 5.6-5.8 outside.

One very good example of an exciting and wonderful climb sub 5.6. Gunsight to South Peak at Seneca Rocks in WV. 5.3. I was giggling the whole way up because of the exposure.

https://www.mountainproject.com/v/gunsight-to-south-peak/105924140/

ViperScale wrote:

I personally find doing 500ft+ 5.6-5.8 routes my favorite climbing because I don't have to worry about falling but just get to purely enjoy the climbing. At least for the level I can climb at, practice 5.12s in the gym so i can relax on 5.6-5.8 outside.

I personally find doing 2000ft+ 5.2-5.3 routes (with some optional 5.5-6 moves) my favorite climbing because I just get to purely enjoy the climbing.

But I do worry about falling. Because of a rock hold pulling loose.

Multi-pitch climbing with rope is inefficient for enjoyable climbing because I spend more than half my time waiting while my partner climbs.

My other favorite climbing is 500+ Via Ferrata routes 5.8-5.10b with my Skylotec Skyrider VF kit clipped to the fixed steel cable for protection -- because I get to purely enjoy the climbing -- with very little fear of falling -- though I still need to worry about loose rock if I allow other parties to climb above ahead of me.

Ken

We have so much easy climbing in Colorado and some of it is quite long.  I sometimes refer to it as "vertical hiking".   Nice mellow day hanging off the rock and taking in the views.  I love it!

kenr wrote:

Multi-pitch climbing with rope is inefficient for enjoyable climbing because I spend more than half my time waiting while my partner climbs.

My other favorite climbing is 500+ Via Ferrata routes 5.8-5.10b with my Skylotec Skyrider VF kit clipped to the fixed steel cable for protection -- because I get to purely enjoy the climbing -- with very little fear of falling -- though I still need to worry about loose rock if I allow other parties to climb above ahead of me.

Ken

(Education  request) 5.8 via feratta???

Where do such beasts live? I always thought VF   was basically a high rope  course on rock with no skill needed.

Dan

Alex McKenzie wrote:

One very good example of an exciting and wonderful climb sub 5.6. Gunsight to South Peak at Seneca Rocks in WV. 5.3. I was giggling the whole way up because of the exposure.

https://www.mountainproject.com/v/gunsight-to-south-peak/105924140/

This looks awesome. Had NO IDEA anything like that existed in WV.

Oh, yeah...Seneca is ace.

rgold wrote:

Wolfs head? That was so fantastic last summer I did it twice in one trip