Bouldering is Trad

The real “traditional” climbers are not the people with climbing racks. Common argument on mountain project is that trad today isn’t trad, and I think what they mean to say is that bouldering is the current form of “traditional climbing”. Qualities that people consider in traditional ascents:

• going ground up
• limited beta/knowledge
• high consequence falls
• a sense of the unknown/uncertainty of getting to the top
• little hang dogging (sometimes pre inspection but not much)
• generally anti bolt (very few boulders have bolts in them but yes some do)

These are all common in bouldering.

Modern day gear climbing:

• a website dedicated to telling you route info from gear to anchors to detailed topos
• full knowledge of all the gear placements you need to bring
• grabbing/ aiding on gear constantly
• a backup plan for not getting to the top/someone to rope gun around
• constant hang dogging
• generally pro bolt

Bouldering is the modern day “traditional” climbing. When that old timer talks about how kids these days don’t know what a real “trad” climb is, maybe point them to the bouldering subforum.

Edit: Where are the jtree/mt Woodson people, that stuff is bouldering trad…

Back in the day, when you got into climbing, you trad climbed, because it was the original discipline.

Now, when you get into climbing, you boulder with your shirt off at an indoor gym. 

Surefire case to me.

Princess Puppy Lovr wrote:

• limited beta/knowledge

I guess you haven't heard of the internet.

Maybe bouldering is the real trad, but only highballs over 40’ with no pads or spotters.  And maybe a gear placement or two.  Belayer OK as well. Hm. 

Princess Puppy Lovr wrote:
going ground up

• limited beta/knowledge
• high consequence falls
• a sense of the unknown/uncertainty of getting to the top
• little hang dogging (sometimes pre inspection but not much)
• generally anti bolt (very few boulders have bolts in them but yes some do)

These are all common in bouldering.

Most of these are NOT common in bouldering. If I don’t flash it, I’m going to try moves out of order. Even stacking pads. If I’m stuck, I’ll watch all the beta vids on YouTube. I don’t climb problems with high consequence falls. Often I can pre-inspect most of the holds from the ground. The boulderer that you describe is a rare beast.

That said, I was exclusively a trad climber for 6 or 7 years before I warmed to bouldering, and I actually do think the two disciplines share a lot. For me, they are both more mentally demanding than sport climbing. On a well equipped sport climb with a stick clip, I am basically never in danger. Not true with boulders and trad. They are also more “pure” from an aesthetic standpoint. I think most American sport climbs are ugly. Just a random path up a sea of overhanging choss. Boulders and cracks, for me, have more interesting, naturally occurring  shapes and features. 

Creed Archibald wrote:

 Just a random path up a sea of overhanging choss. 

the definition of beauty

Creed Archibald wrote:

Most of these are NOT common in bouldering. If I don’t flash it, I’m going to try moves out of order. Even stacking pads. If I’m stuck, I’ll watch all the beta vids on YouTube. I don’t climb problems with high consequence falls. Often I can pre-inspect most of the holds from the ground. The boulderer that you describe is a rare beast.

That said, I was exclusively a trad climber for 6 or 7 years before I warmed to bouldering, and I actually do think the two disciplines share a lot. For me, they are both more mentally demanding than sport climbing. On a well equipped sport climb with a stick clip, I am basically never in danger. Not true with boulders and trad. They are also more “pure” from an aesthetic standpoint. I think most American sport climbs are ugly. Just a random path up a sea of overhanging choss. Boulders and cracks, for me, have more interesting, naturally occurring  shapes and features. 

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but lumping "american sport climbs" together when they span a massive geographical area with multiple kinds of rock and ecosystems and variability just to conclude "most are ugly" is not much different than saying "most americans are ugly."  (It's commonly accepted that Europe has better sport climbs than America, but still...)

 And developers - while you may have thought you were painstakingly working out sequences and finding the exact right place to locate a bolt given the possible clipping holds and the rock quality and the possibility for the rope to come taut over sharp edges during a fall, buddy here thinks most of your routes are tantamount to "a random path up a sea of overhanging choss." 

So just admit it, fellow developers! You bolt blindfolded. You literally roll dice to see which direction the next bolt goes from the last, or how far apart they will be! Anchors, just throw them anywhere! 

It may be you've spent a lot of time climbing polished and grid bolted limestone in Utah and surrounding states and now have contempt for the time, money and amazing labor of those who put up the routes you don't like, but climb anyway. Familiarity breeds contempt. Its why I haven't been to Smith rock (2.5 hours away) in a couple years after climbing there since 1999, and now I mainly go to obscure crags to put up or climb new lines. Beats complaining about Smith!  

Creed Archibald wrote:

Most of these are NOT common in bouldering. If I don’t flash it, I’m going to try moves out of order.

This depends on the boulder there are a lot of boulders in Washington that can't be done out of order bricklayer (you also can't really inspect it on rappel and can't stack pads), metroid prime (the crux is kinda the next move from the first picture, you would probably need a lot of pads to inspect the crux), Ryan's Problem. If you thinking I am being picky these all all listed as classics on the MP page.

 Even stacking pads. If I’m stuck, I’ll watch all the beta vids on YouTube.

In Washington bouldering areas without cell reception: leavenworth past the fridge boulder, parts of gold bar, miller river valley, stevens pass boulders, middle fork (wait did I just list all the bouldering areas Seattle people visit?) 

 I don’t climb problems with high consequence falls. Often I can pre-inspect most of the holds from the ground. The boulderer that you describe is a rare beast.

I think the ratio of people doing high balls exceeds the ratio of people climbing over garbage gear. 

That said, I was exclusively a trad climber for 6 or 7 years before I warmed to bouldering, and I actually do think the two disciplines share a lot. For me, they are both more mentally demanding than sport climbing. On a well equipped sport climb with a stick clip, I am basically never in danger. Not true with boulders and trad. They are also more “pure” from an aesthetic standpoint. I think most American sport climbs are ugly. Just a random path up a sea of overhanging choss. 

Choss is naturally occurring. 

Boulders and cracks, for me, have more interesting, naturally occurring  shapes and features. 

Ugh hate to tell you but boulders are just bigger pieces of choss.

Rocrates wrote:

Maybe bouldering is the real trad, but only highballs over 40’ with no pads or spotters.  And maybe a gear placement or two.  Belayer OK as well. Hm.

I would be more impressed by a 40 foot send on one crash pad than two gear placements

Ryan Never climbs wrote:

It’s practice for real climbing

Practice->bouldering->is trad climbing then trad climbing is practice?

Bryce A wrote:

I guess you haven't heard of the internet.

Often I climb without my phone or working phone or I don't have cell reception. Generally a bouldering book shows the start and the end and leaves the rest up to you while roped climbing books at least give you the spray for what gear sizes you will place... 

My argument is also not that these things are common but the average modern day boulderer is more similar to the old school trad climber than the new school trad climber.

To the newbies: MP used to be really good. Great trip reports. Sincere opinions being expressed. Intriguing questions spawning interesting responses. Guys like Donini and Long weighing in.

 Now, guys like Trevor create multiple accounts just to post this kind of clickbait trash. Honestly, I'm not sure why I even check MP anymore. 

I love all forms of climbing and think all are great. They all similarities, but also emphasize certain movements that make them a bit different.

Sport, trad, and bouldering all follow natural lines on rock. The gear for all three disciplines is really just there for safety and the mark of mastery in each is to be able to climb a route without relying on that gear. Sport, bouldering, and trad are equally demanding mentally, just in different ways.

If we really want to split hairs over gear affecting the mental demand of trad and sport; between stoppers, hexes, cams, slings around horns and chock stones, and other specialty pieces you can typically place another piece of gear if needed for reassurance, but you can't clip a bolt that isn't there. Bolts can be rusted, loose, missing and otherwise unreliable or not thoughtfully placed for clipping position (due to some people just rappelling and placing bolts randomly every like eight feet); "bad gear placements" happen with both disciplines. Runouts can occur in either discipline.

The technical climbing skill required in sport, trad, and bouldering isn't really more or less, but the specific skills required are different. Sport requires face climbing skills more so than the typical crack jamming of trad, while both may crossover with some routes (usually in small sections, but occasionally even full routes). Bouldering is basically just taking the most fun and/or challenging section of a sport or trad route and climbing it in isolation.

In my opinion, the amount of time and prep each requires is probably the most meaningful difference when choosing which to do. Bouldering is typically just tossing a pad down and hopping on the rock. Bouldering can also be done solo more easily and safely. Sport requires more time for not only gear prep and usage, but also for the length of the climb. Trad requires even more prep and climbing time than sport due to the gear (not always a ton more time, but a bit).

For me it really just depends on the time I have that day and if I have a partner for climbing that day. No partner? Then it's bouldering or the gym or sometimes I'll just go rappel down a route for fun (been tempted to free solo on those days too, more so on easy routes I've climbed before, but never tempted on routes with which I have no experience). Partner? How much time do we have, where are we going and how long is the approach, how much gear do we feel like carrying? Do we want to maximize the number of climbs? Do we have the extra time to clean potentially troublesome pieces of gear? Build anchors? Travel time (not a a ton of good trad near here, so we have to travel a bit farther). There's a lot that can eat up time and a lot that can be cut out in sport to streamline and just get climbing, but there are a lot of potential climbs we could do with trad that we otherwise couldn't just bringing sport gear.

Sport, trad, and bouldering are all different, but also similar in many ways (aside from the obvious). They are all great.

It's really a subjective subject and not everyone has the option to do all disciplines due to time, expense, geography (those poor souls in Florida and other "flat" places lol). However, it is a fun troll subject or as a way to reflect on why we enjoy something as pointless as climbing, where we could exercise in so many other ways, where we look at the easier path 10ft to our side and say "nah, we're going up this difficult piece of work instead just because".

bryans wrote:

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but lumping "american sport climbs" together when they span a massive geographical area with multiple kinds of rock and ecosystems and variability just to conclude "most are ugly" is not much different than saying "most americans are ugly."  (It's commonly accepted that Europe has better sport climbs than America, but still...)

 And developers - while you may have thought you were painstakingly working out sequences and finding the exact right place to locate a bolt given the possible clipping holds and the rock quality and the possibility for the rope to come taut over sharp edges during a fall, buddy here thinks most of your routes are tantamount to "a random path up a sea of overhanging choss." 

So just admit it, fellow developers! You bolt blindfolded. You literally roll dice to see which direction the next bolt goes from the last, or how far apart they will be! Anchors, just throw them anywhere! 

It may be you've spent a lot of time climbing polished and grid bolted limestone in Utah and surrounding states and now have contempt for the time, money and amazing labor of those who put up the routes you don't like, but climb anyway. Familiarity breeds contempt. Its why I haven't been to Smith rock (2.5 hours away) in a couple years after climbing there since 1999, and now I mainly go to obscure crags to put up or climb new lines. Beats complaining about Smith!  

Whoa. You really ran with that. There's nothing in my post about contempt for sport climbing or developers. I like sport climbing and I appreciate the work that goes into development. I'm just stating a preference for the shapes and features of cracks and boulders. Sport climbs rarely have interesting or distinguishing features, even if the movement is fantastic. It's no one's fault. That's just the nature of the rock. 

Edit to add: When I say "random," I'm not suggesting the bolts are placed randomly, but rather that a sport climb often looks no different than the route on either side of it. I rarely look at a sport climb and think, "Damn that line is so beautiful. I must climb it." 

Creed Archibald wrote:

Whoa. You really ran with that. There's nothing in my post about contempt for sport climbing or developers. I like sport climbing and I appreciate the work that goes into development. I'm just stating a preference for the shapes and features of cracks and boulders. Sport climbs rarely have interesting or distinguising features, even if the movement is fantastic. It's no one's fault. That's just the nature of the rock. 

Fair enough, I did put words in your mouth a bit, and I'm not trying to start a fight!  I also prefer trad or boudering to sport. That said, I do think there are some beautiful and inspiring sport lines out there. Aretes make great features for bolting.  Here's me on the FA of one I bolted just a month ago - I think it's gorgeous. No choss here. Bulletproof overhung basalt literally 3 miles from the Portland airport. I also bolted that seam to the left, another cool sustained feature that is not random and starts with a powerful boulder problem (see what i did there?) left left of the lichen patches. Both routes clock in around 11d for now, but might change with more ascents. (And yes, I guess this qualifies as spray - but some spray is OK, right?)

C Archibolt wrote:

Whoa. You really ran with that. There's nothing in my post about contempt for sport climbing or developers. I like sport climbing and I appreciate the work that goes into development. I'm just stating a preference for the shapes and features of cracks and boulders. Sport climbs rarely have interesting or distinguishing features, even if the movement is fantastic. It's no one's fault. That's just the nature of the rock. 

Edit to add: When I say "random," I'm not suggesting the bolts are placed randomly, but rather that a sport climb often looks no different than the route on either side of it. I rarely look at a sport climb and think, "Damn that line is so beautiful. I must climb it." 

Mr. Archibolt you're sport climbing in the wrong places.  If you got time I'll take you to some good features, maybe change your mind. 

bryans wrote:

Fair enough, I did put words in your mouth a bit, and I'm not trying to start a fight!  I also prefer trad or boudering to sport. That said, I do think there are some beautiful and inspiring sport lines out there. Aretes make great features for bolting.  Here's me on the FA of one I bolted just a month ago - I think it's gorgeous. No choss here. Bulletproof overhung basalt literally 3 miles from the Portland airport. I also bolted that seam to the left, another cool sustained feature that is not random and starts with a powerful boulder problem (see what i did there?) left left of the lichen patches. Both routes clock in around 11d for now, but might change with more ascents. (And yes, I guess this qualifies as spray - but some spray is OK, right?)

I'm fine with spray. That route looks rad, and I agree that aretes are often the coolest features at the sport crag. There are also cool color streaks sometimes, like at Tensleep. I sport climb mostly in American Fork. Even when I really enjoy the routes I seldom think they look especially neat. 

bryans wrote:

To the newbies: MP used to be really good. 

Really if you go to the last page of MP it is the exact same stuff....if anything it is worse...

Great trip reports. Sincere opinions being expressed. 

This is sincere, its just not a popular opinion. That is what is dumb, that people are so entrenched in their way of thinking that they can't think about something differently at all and they can't humor the idea in anyway. No one has really articulated why going to climb some classic crack is more similar to old school traditional climbing over modern day bouldering. 

Intriguing questions spawning interesting responses. Guys like Donini and Long weighing in.

 Now, guys like Trevor create multiple accounts just to post this kind of clickbait trash.

Technically you clicked and you can block. If anything you are proof that my titles are good. Also my account duplication has been chronicled.

If you are a manifestation of old MP, no thanks. You come into this thread, ignore the topic attack me, then you attack some stranger, then talk about your FAs and then double down in a wired way to reinforce your own ego, like why?

 Honestly, I'm not sure why I even check MP anymore. 

Thats not on me.

C Archibolt wrote:

I'm fine with spray. That route looks rad, and I agree that aretes are often the coolest features at the sport crag. There are also cool color streaks sometimes, like at Tensleep. I sport climb mostly in American Fork. Even when I really enjoy the routes I seldom think they look especially neat. 

If the majority of your sport climbing is AF I get it and I like AF.  But honest offer come up to Ogden early Saturday I'll get you on some good bolted choss.

This is an interesting thread. More than sixty years ago, when I began to gently nudge bouldering away from a casual pastime for traditional climbers to a more or less separate discipline, I tried to do so by shifting the perception of climbing being an extension of hiking to bouldering being an extension of gymnastics, introducing chalk, controlled dynamics, and training regimens. 

Historical climbing grading schemes, like the alpine I –VI grades, went from gentle hikes to the most severe challenges. 

On the three tiny Jenny Lake boulders,  Chouinard, Rearick, Kamps and I and others created, from necessity, a host of problems by elimination of holds, roughly paralleling gymnastic performances, going from beginning to end – or bottom to top, or side to side – using different sequences like gymnasts performing different routines on the same apparatus. 

I’ve seen bouldering go in at least three different directions in my lifetime: Traditional bouldering where one goes up a small, challenging section of rock using any combination of holds and techniques; Gym bouldering where holds are detachable and moved around on a bouldering wall, or color coded to distinguish problems; Highball bouldering, which is controlled insanity. 

Traditional bouldering is miniaturized trad free climbing, but formal competitive bouldering on artificial surfaces is more gymnastic, especially now that parkour has been introduced in this setting – greater use of momentum sequences. I think there are now companies that build outdoor artificial boulders for placements in parks. I could be mistaken, but I seem to have read of future placements in Hasenheidi park in Berlin, the site of the first outdoor gymnastics facility (turnplatz) in 1811, designed by Jahn, the father of gymnastics. Unfortunately it was torn down less than ten years later because of political turmoil.

Disclaimer: this is a stupid flame argument we're having, ignore the below post and listen to Gill.

bryans wrote:

To the newbies: MP used to be really good. Great trip reports. Sincere opinions being expressed. Intriguing questions spawning interesting responses. Guys like Donini and Long weighing in.

I think you're describing Super Yacko

 Now, guys like Trevor create multiple accounts just to post this kind of clickbait trash. Honestly, I'm not sure why I even check MP anymore. 

Bud. You've barely been posting consistently for two years and have less than half my posts, and I've been posting here for less than a year. You have a total of 1.5 pages of posts from 2006 to 2019. And generally all your posts have been a) dumb politics arguments b) local shit that should have been on Cascadeclimbers and c) complaining about how it used to be in the old days.

If you want it like the old days again, fucking post some 'sincere opinions' and maybe Long will show up and weigh in. Except he won't, cause you have nothing to say but complaints. Post a trip report or two if you happen to get out. This kind of MP-signaling (especially jumping on the hate Trevor band wagon so people will smash the like button) is weak garbage. 90% of the posters on MP treat it like some fucking extension of Facebook and Trevor is the antidote to that shit.

And throughout this, you CONTINUE to write YDS grades with a DASH

"John what is your opinion on bouldering grades?"

Simple ascending, uncapped scales were inevitable as climbing populations grew and stronger athletes appeared. Look what happened in competitive gymnastics. For a long time 0 - 10 was enough, then the upper bound was removed as tougher stunts were done. Grades are approximations. For a more objective approach in a popular bouldering spot a par system might work. How many attempts on a problem do top ranked boulderers require? Take an average. Just a thought.

John Gill wrote:

"John what is your opinion on bouldering grades?"

Simple ascending, uncapped scales were inevitable as climbing populations grew and stronger athletes appeared. Look what happened in competitive gymnastics. For a long time 0 - 10 was enough, then the upper bound was removed as tougher stunts were done. Grades are approximations. For a more objective approach in a popular bouldering spot a par system might work. How many attempts on a problem do top ranked boulderers require? Take an average. Just a thought.

That’s an interesting idea, it would work for outdoor comps or among equal climbers but a newbie would probably get max par.

For a more objective rating scale using some form of ranked based voting/max diff would improve it (but your a real math guy). Where climbers would rank climbs in difficulty. This could also be applied cross disciplines tho it might get weird results.

To the other posters I guess more specifically I don’t understand how a 25 ft Mt. Woodson/ J Tree climb is any different with a few cams or a crash pad? I think a crash pad would be an improvement in style over the traditional ethic.

Edit: Bryan’s I’m in Portland this weekend and could squeak out a climb if you wanna kick it.