The ETHICS of Training.

Dean-o! N wrote:

The incessant need to train for climbing is cheating relative to the first ascensionist who didn't train.

What makes you think the FAists didn't train?

This is an ethics issue through and through. 

No. Ethics is how what you do affects others. You're talking about style.

Just my two cents. I am way more impressed by the first ascensionist who put routes up than the person who spent 6 months in the gym and hopped outside.

You do realize how much time Caldwell, Ondra, Hill, Jorgeson, Rodden, et al spend in the gym, yes? 

Dean, you're probably trolling but I'll try to answer your question. If you're not trolling, holy shit chill out dude it's just a sport.

Training is essential to opening up new things to climb. When it comes down to it, all I want out of climbing is to be able to see a cool line and be able to climb it. The harder I train, the more options I have for cool lines to climb. I don't see much difference in training by going to a gym, or training by trying and failing on a hard route outside. If I lived close enough to real rock to exclusively climb outside I might never go to the gym, but that's not the case. It seems that you think the only ascents that deserve credit are outdoor onsights, that's your prerogative but I completely disagree. In fact, I think there's something ethically wrong with onsighting everything you climb (unless you're Aleks). If you're not falling, sack up and get on something over your head. Pushing yourself outside of your comfort zone is part of the experience, if you always feel safe and secure you're doing it wrong.

Dean-o! N wrote:

It's not a joke it's shameful. Many here are too embarrassed to admit that they lie and cheat. Anything to one-up other people around. Many willing to climb an indoor route molded from an outdoor climb and claim an ascent.

I applaud Dean-O's courage in asking the hard questions.  A friend of mine recently married a guy that had an identical twin brother.  Now my friend's new hubby and his brother looked exactly the same.  So, using the clearheaded logic of this thread, my friend had obviously married them both.  This is bigamy and it is illegal.  I only wish Dean-O had been there to protest this travesty.

We've missed trees for forests and far worse. Again with the marijuana.

I have already conceded that training is helpful. Training for climbing is not the same as climbing. It may be a facet of climbing but it is not climbing in and of itself.

Dean-o! N wrote:

We've missed trees for forests and far worse. Again with the marijuana.

I have already conceded that training is helpful. Training for climbing is not the same as climbing. It may be a facet of climbing but it is not climbing in and of itself.

 I agree training is not climbing but isn't all climbing training? 

Yep! And that has been my thesis the entire time.

Just go climb and you get all the training you would ever need!

I want to know where this ‘simulated by molding an outside route’ climb is. 

And what route is it simulating? Anything worthwhile? 

Personally, I’d love a simulation of Midnight Lightning, especially if it was mega indoors bouldering gym padded. 

Dean-o! N wrote:

Training for climbing is not the same as climbing. It may be a facet of climbing but it is not climbing in and of itself.

Finally you said something that wasn't total BS.  However, training for climbing WILL make one a better climber.

Eric Carlos wrote:

However, training for climbing WILL make one a better climber.

Apparently not in Dean’s case

Marc801 C wrote:

What makes you think the FAists didn't train?

Indeed.  OP needs to do some homework on John Stannard's breakthrough FAs of the 60's.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

Personally, I’d love a simulation of Midnight Lightning, especially if it was mega indoors bouldering gym padded. 

Preferably, w/ the mantle a separate boulder problem 3 feet off the ground.

I was going to give the OP 3/10, but since this got to 5 pages, I'm giving it a 6, 7 if it goes to 10.

Robert Michael wrote:

I was going to give the OP 3/10, but since this got to 5 pages, I'm giving it a 6, 7 if it goes to 10.

I disagree. Trolling quality should be based on degree of outrage generated - ie: quality over quantity!

Marc801 C wrote:

I disagree. Trolling quality should be based on degree of outrage generated - ie: quality over quantity!

Dean-O's persistence is quite impressive. But his peacocking and his requests for attention directly definitely detract from his overall score...

I chipped all the holds on my gym's moonboard. Is that unethical?

Brandon.Phillips wrote:

I chipped all the holds on my gym's moonboard. Is that unethical?

Not if you did it ground-up, on lead, from a stance.

Andrew Krajnik wrote:

Not if you did it ground-up, on lead, from a stance.

Chipping a moonboard would also be acceptable if you aid it.

Training is so hawt right now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwypguS69fQ