Bad belay or not? Hair Lip, Suicide

ViperScale wrote:

True I forget there is no such thing as a sport route in NC... I am not talking about what you call a runout bolt protected only trad route (which I think are stupid) to west coast. I am comparing sport routes in NC and other states around NC to sport routes on the west coast. West coast bolts are still alot closer than east coast routes. Tons of routes on the west coast in multi areas I have been that have bolts so close you can stand on one bolt and clip the next, that isn't common on the east coast.

Living in NC I completely understand how alot of old school climbers for some reason feel the need to make sure you can die on alot of routes. I think it is stupid. I don't think everything needs to be bolted, I personally prefer climbing without bolts. I also think it is stupid to not add bolts to any route to make it say if needed. I think as time goes on and old guys die off we will get more and more safer routes to climb. 

I think back to some of the routes I have heard of here where the FA went back and added additional bolts to his climb and others went behind the FA and cut the bolts because they wanted it keep it dangerous. Stuff like that is just stupid.

Oh dear. Viper, I only know a few locations, but, what I can say about those, is it seems to be a time frame, not East or West. 

All our oldest stuff is trad, sport went up starting heavily in the 80's. But, I wouldn't describe a single climb here as "overbolted", and a great many assume you will put in a piece or two of gear. 

A lot of routes still warn, "don't blow the third clip", this, on routes that only have six bolts in the first place.

An area close by, developed recently, has quite nice spacing, on the other hand, and not "spicy" at all.

Best, Helen

Edit to add: remember, dirt bags traveled back then, too! Spurts of development here were often some inspiring hot shot coming through, or, our local hot shots coming back fired up from some place else.

GDavis wrote:

I think this thread is done now

Given the way it was presented, EDIT ! : thnx for the quote,, Having now gone back and watched it on a better device, I take back the editing comment,,,   There is none.  it (still) seems staged. ( 2nd edit: The guy, has the good luck to fall, in front of the camera?)You can not make any value judgment on the quality of the belay. You don't see the belayer, or the action (3rd edit: yes, as to it being a lazy belay - too, ) other than what looks to be a staged -for publicity-  fall. Paddling your feet on a slab climb will result in the same result every time.  Stick a foot, move the other, inches sometimes - full steps other times, - but paddling your feet one on top of the other like that looks intentional !  That is a sure recipe to cause a fall.

Michael Schneider wrote:

Given the way it was presented, and by adding all the editing, it seems staged. You can not make any value judgment on the quality of the belay. You don't see the belayer, or the action other than what looks to be a staged -for publicity-  fall.

That was some good acting by the climber if it was staged.

ViperScale wrote:

You need to travel - a lot more. Your statement above is patently false.

You really have no understanding of the different genres of climbing at all.

Someone staged a swinging lead fall into a sharp edge? HOKAY...

Viper you don't have cajoles for to climb in CA must be why you so bitter

I am sorry just because historically they were climbed that way doesn't mean you should leave them that way? Do you still climb on gear from the 70s and 80s? What type of climbing shoes and harnesses do you use today? Just because a route was climbed dangerously back in the day is no reason to not improve it. Modern technology is a good thing not a bad thing, 

Just because a route was climbed on lead and bolts were put in with a hand drill extremely run out is not a good excuse for not going back and adding more to make it reasonably safe.

Like I have said this doesn't mean adding a bolt every 3-5ft but there is nothing wrong with going back and adding a few bolts on a 50ft runout where zero gear placements exist.

If you want to free solo than by all means go for it but most people don't want to climb something when it must be 2-3 grades under their limit because a fall would mean death or possible months in a hospital / being paralyzed.

Yea I do need to travel more I have climbed in almost every state (that has climbing) and most major climbing destinations in the US but have only climbed outside the US in Africa one time =/

tl:dr I'm new

ViperScale wrote:

The Challenge is to accept what you aren't capable of doing, even though others have been able, and move on with what makes your climbing meaningful for you. I know that is hard to do, but sometimes you just have to accept that other men are made out of different cloth.

There are thousands and thousands and thousands of new routes to do, long and short. 

Get off your ass and make them the way you want and more power to you.

But reality is that if you don't have the balls to do some routes you don't get to do them until you get some. There is a lesson there I hope you grasp someday instead of advocating that every route be brought down to your level.

You are case in point of someone who (apparently) claims to have strong fingers but knows nothing about climbing.

I get it dude, I really do. Climbing IS about overcoming fears and the joy of movement over stone and lovely bolts are part of overcoming that fear. They make the impossible or suicidal, possible. But you don't get to add them to other people's routes, just your own. No matter how afraid you are.

That is climbing. Get it? Its a challenge.

"...other men are made of different cloth..." And women!

Just curious here how many people who have been posting this shit have free soloed a climb that has involved at least 30mins of their time that a single mistake would have been death? 

Because most of these responses I have seen are complete bullshit. At least in my responses I feel I have a little room to talk since I have climbed a 500ft route that a single mistake past around 50ft most likely would have been death. You all are posting like climbing something that involves making a mistake and dying is nothing... I have a feeling most of you have never even climbed something where a mistake is death.

ViperScale wrote:

Just curious here how many people who have been posting this shit have free soloed a climb that has involved at least 30mins of their time that a single mistake would have been death? 

Because most of these responses I have seen are complete bullshit. At least in my responses I feel I have a little room to talk since I have climbed a 500ft route that a single mistake past around 50ft most likely would have been death.

Quoting so that this nonsense doesn't vanish.

Marc801 C wrote:

Quoting so that this nonsense doesn't vanish.

Do you climb in a swami belt, boots, and use real nuts as gear placements too????

We should meet up and go climbing as a group. I like to climb with true old school people who don't use all these retarded modern cams and climbing shoes!!!!

I mean come on everyone is saying if there is a free solo possible death run out that you can't changed the route and add 1 more bolt. You must be one of those old school people. This logic makes perfect sense to me!!! Force everyone to free solo the route it should not be optional!!!

This video I think fits into this thread perfectly.

All I can do is laugh.

The ego and desire to remake the world (as it is) into what suits this grasshopper (vanilla chai latte) is strong.

Honestly, you should figure out who you are talking to before you try to pretend you are some kinda badass lol.

Marc801 C wrote:

Quoting so that this nonsense doesn't vanish.

So good.  Made my morning.

Yes, Viper, there are routes that should be left as is. Not even anchors added.

Some areas should never be "developed" at all. Not even a guidebook, not even a route, not even a road...

It's called outdoors. 

Some areas  were developed  decades ago, and are hit  and miss for bolt/anchor replacement. Others have had bolting bans in place long enough, what's there is getting pretty sketch, so you better not be counting on that bolt to save you anyway.

Best, really sir, I do wish you well, Helen

Old lady H wrote:

Yes, Viper, there are routes that should be left as is. Not even anchors added.

Some areas should never be "developed" at all. Not even a guidebook, not even a route, not even a road...

It's called outdoors. 

Some areas  were developed  decades ago, and are hit  and miss for bolt/anchor replacement. Others have had bolting bans in place long enough, what's there is getting pretty sketch, so you better not be counting on that bolt to save you anyway.

Best, really sir, I do wish you well, Helen

I am sorry when did I ever say everything should be bolted?

1) I said a classic climb is still going to be a classic good climb whether it is bolted or not.

2) I said if a climb that is a classic needs extra bolts to make it safe they should just add them, if it is a trad climb and can be protected safely without a bolt don't put a bolt in.

I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. I know a few trad routes in NC that have 1 bolt in the entire multi pitch climb because it was needed to make a small section safer. If they are doing that in NC where bolts are the devil I don't see how anywhere else could have a problem with this. Given there are plenty of other routes that could use more to make the climbs reasonably safer (getting hurt is fine but possible death from a fall isn't) but like I said bolts are the devil here.

ViperScale wrote:

I am sorry when did I ever say everything should be bolted?

1) I said a classic climb is still going to be a classic good climb whether it is bolted or not.

2) I said if a climb that is a classic needs extra bolts to make it safe they should just add them, if it is a trad climb and can be protected safely without a bolt don't put a bolt in.

I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. I know a few trad routes in NC that have 1 bolt in the entire multi pitch climb because it was needed to make a small section safer. If they are doing that in NC where bolts are the devil I don't see how anywhere else could have a problem with this. Given there are plenty of other routes that could use more to make the climbs reasonably safer (getting hurt is fine but possible death from a fall isn't) but like I said bolts are the devil here.

Ah! Well, there is a simple solution we could perhaps both agree on: talk to the FA. That is still a possibility much of the time.

EDIT to add: Viper, adding the hardware does change the climb. People assume what is there is how the route goes. Pretty reasonable.

An example here, is that most of the routes were originally topped out. Later, bolted anchors were added. Talking to an FA from way back, he is okay with the anchors, now, but he wasn't earlier. He also told me that getting over the lip was often "the most interesting part". Knowing this man viewed our local cliffs as "practice" for the real thing, technical routes up big mountains, his idea of "interesting" is ....probably very interesting!

And, my personal tick list includes re climbing a route of his I did, skipping the added anchors to top out.

But the only reason I know to do that, is because I have that information. 

OLH

Yes Ive soloed routes and yes you're still wrong and yes you should not climb in CA it is not for you 

Adding anchors to the top of a route that originally didn't have anchors would change a route because it is shorting it down. Adding a bolt in the middle of a 50ft runout with no gear placements on the other hand doesn't change the route and only makes it safer by changing the fall risk from a 100ft to a 50ft.

Of course if the route originally traversed to the side to follow a crack for protection and a bolt was added to a direct climb where it was unprotected you are likely to permanently change the climb because people will start climbing the new direct method instead of the original climb.

GDavis wrote:

Yes Ive soloed routes and yes you're still wrong and yes you should not climb in CA it is not for you 

Why CA is really safe climbs most of my harder climbs were while in CA. I rarely climb hard locally because it isn't worth the risk of injury.

So you solo but have you ever tried to look at things from others point of view? I have soloed, I have climbed plenty of 50-60ft runouts, personally don't like them but will do it if needed. However most people will not do them and to me it is kinda sad when they exist because I don't know anyone who climbs at their limit on the runout routes. Do you climb at your max ability where there is a high chance of falling on 50ft + runouts (where the crux at your max ability is in the runout)?