Grading Routes Pre-Ascent=NO!

Cherokee Nuneswrote:

Grading a route you haven't climbed? What kind of slubberdegullion does that???

Graduates of Google University with a Master's degree from Instagram.

Best. Troll. Ever.  

What happened in the Red that was so very dreadful?

soft cruxwrote:

By this logic, every noob on their fist day is immediately qualified to rate any climb they attempt.

That's not at all what he's trying to say. You can disagree without sensationalizing what he said. It's actually a good counterpoint to the OP. Framing it the way you do just tries to shut down discussion on what is a pretty decent point. 

Pete Swrote:

Best. Troll. Ever.  

It's a good one simply because it seems 75+% of you all are grading routes you haven't sent. Please stop now. And if you want to be a good little girl or boy, go back and delete all of your unworthy spray from the internet. Leave your proposed grades in the comments of your ticks where they belong, and has no affect on the actual grade. Anyone who's ever claimed "The Red is soft" should back this initiative to rid the world of pre-send spray lords.

I guarantee no one has ever downgraded a route they can't climb, it's only up for those folks.

Daniel Chode Riderwrote:

What happened in the Red that was so very dreadful?

Based on circumstantial evidence from this thread and others I would hypothesize that someone downgraded one of his squeeze jobs and now he's mad that his proud fist ascent isn't getting the credit and fanfare he thinks it deserves.

I distinctly remember a certain guy named Matt Jaggers tell everyone at the crag that the route he bolted, and hadn’t sent yet, was probably a 12c. The route is now in the database as 12a.

But it’s ok, he was only “grading it” to people at the crag. It’s the internet that counts. Obviously.

*just to be clear, I have no problem at all with someone thinking the route is one grade, while working it, and choosing to grade it differently at the end. I would also have no problem at all if the same person grades it 12c on the Internet, when he first tried it, and changed it later,  just like I don’t have a problem with someone saying it out loud to people nearby.

if a route is listed as a project, and given a grade, I take that grade for what it’s worth-and estimate. An open project listed as 13b is not likely to be an 11 with a hidden heel hook. Aldo not likely to be a 14, if the developer, who has never climbed a 14, but has climbed lots of 13s, can do all moves on the route, and feels it’s a 13  

I just find the whole thing hillarious  

Lena chitawrote:

I distinctly remember a certain guy named Matt Jaggers tell everyone at the crag that the route he bolted, and hadn’t sent yet, was probably a 12c. The route is now in the database as 12a.

But it’s ok, he was only “grading it” to people at the crag. It’s the internet that counts. Obviously.

*just to be clear, I have no problem at all with someone thinking the route is one grade, while working it, and choosing to grade it differently at the end. I would also have no problem at all if the same person grades it 12c on the Internet, when he first tried it, and changed it later,  just like I don’t have a problem with someone saying it out loud to people nearby.

I just find the whole thing hillarious  

I never talk to "everyone at the crag", especially you, Lena. And speculating on a grade of a newly bolted route i haven't climbed yet is not even in the same realm as failing on an established route and saying it's harder than it is. I dont spray about routes, someone asked me what I thought it might be, and I told them. Again, very different than you getting shut down and coming on here to upgrade a route to make yourself feel better.Your anecdote actually proves my point. I thought Cross Contamination was going to be harder, until I spent the time working out the beta and putting it all together.

And no, downgrading is not my concern. Upgrading from people who can't climb a route is my concern.

Matthew Jaggerswrote:

It's a good one simply because it seems 75+% of you all are grading routes you haven't sent. Please stop now. And if you want to be a good little girl or boy, go back and delete all of your unworthy spray from the internet. Leave your proposed grades in the comments of your ticks where they belong, and has no affect on the actual grade. Anyone who's ever claimed "The Red is soft" should back this initiative to rid the world of pre-send spray lords.

I guarantee no one has ever downgraded a route they can't climb, it's only up for those folks.

There is no "actual" grade, it's all just opinions, not to mention subjective. People are different and routes climb easier/harder based on body style, experience, etc.

Lena chitawrote:

I distinctly remember a certain guy named Matt Jaggers tell everyone at the crag that the route he bolted, and hadn’t sent yet, was probably a 12c. The route is now in the database as 12a.

But it’s ok, he was only “grading it” to people at the crag. It’s the internet that counts. Obviously.

*just to be clear, I have no problem at all with someone thinking the route is one grade, while working it, and choosing to grade it differently at the end. I would also have no problem at all if the same person grades it 12c on the Internet, when he first tried it, and changed it later,  just like I don’t have a problem with someone saying it out loud to people nearby.

if a route is listed as a project, and given a grade, I take that grade for what it’s worth-and estimate. An open project listed as 13b is not likely to be an 11 with a hidden heel hook. Aldo not likely to be a 14, if the developer, who has never climbed a 14, but has climbed lots of 13s, can do all moves on the route, and feels it’s a 13  

I just find the whole thing hillarious  

Usually any thread started by maja is entertaining for sure. I think that with enough experience, anyone who has climbed enough rock at a certain level(12 and up) can pretty easily look at a line and tell its within a couple letter grades. I've certainly seen people find a line or a boulder and try and grade it much higher than it actually goes, its almost just an optimistic opinion. 

Now back to the drama at the outdoor gym AKA the red.

Tradibanwrote:

There is no "actual" grade, it's all just opinions, not to mention subjective. People are different and routes climb easier/harder based on body style, experience, etc.

I agree. Thats the reason why no one would know until they actually red point a route. I dont care if someone thinks the grade is 10 grades off my opinion, if they actually have climbed it.

Tradibanwrote:

There is no "actual" grade, it's all just opinions, not to mention subjective. People are different and routes climb easier/harder based on body style, experience, etc.

Similar to a red climber who thinks a 12- red climb would be anything but a 10+ at most areas.

A V wrote:

Anyway, I like the idea of just calling things 5.12, 5.11, 5.10 etc and throwing in some plus and minuses in there as well. 

This can all be contained in an already established grade: the infamous old school 5.9+

Carlisle DiValentinwrote:

I didn’t read anything past the title but I’ll give this post a 6/10

Why?  Do you fall off lots of routes, then give them a grade as if you freed them?

T Legowrote:

Are you applying this opinion differently depending on whether the climb is already established or not? 

What's wrong with saying what you think a climb is if you aren't actually claiming a rating? Plenty of climbs begin with walking up to the base, considering how hard a climb looks by sight and giving it a shot. What's wrong with that?

Looking at a known 5.10 and saying, "eh, looks 5.9 to me" is definitely a douchey thing tho 

There's nothing wrong at all if one actually FREES a route, then gives it a grade based on that.  Consensus route ratings should be from people that have freed the entire route, not falls, as in a legitimate free ascent.  If you rested because you fell or yelled "take" then your rating doesn't count for anything because I think we can all agree that climbing a route that is physically difficult will feel easier after a no-hands, no-feet rest one or more times on the route, yes?  Looking at a 5.10, not being able to climb it then saying it's "5.9" or "5.11" or whatever else isn't a thing.  Ratings for FREE climbs should be based on the SUBJECTIVE nature of FREE ascents.  Not hang-dog ascents.  There's not anything terribly difficult to figure out about this philosophy, and it's been this way for a very long time. 

don'tchuffonmewrote:

There's nothing wrong at all if one actually FREES a route, then gives it a grade based on that.  Consensus route ratings should be from people that have freed the entire route, not falls, as in a legitimate free ascent.  If you rested because you fell or yelled "take" then your rating doesn't count for anything because I think we can all agree that climbing a route that is physically difficult will feel easier after a no-hands, no-feet rest one or more times on the route, yes?  Looking at a 5.10, not being able to climb it then saying it's "5.9" or "5.11" or whatever else isn't a thing.  Ratings for FREE climbs should be based on the SUBJECTIVE nature of FREE ascents.  Not hang-dog ascents.  There's not anything terribly difficult to figure out about this philosophy, and it's been this way for a very long time. 

Got it!  I honestly cannot onsight my way out of a paper bag...therefore, everything shall be 5.9 after I’m done sieging it down!

A V wrote:

I think this thread is more about making people squirm about not sending and motivating them to get out and send - as opposed to actually telling people that they can’t have an opinion that something is harder than something else, or easier than something else. People get too worked up about grades - they are fun to talk about, but don’t mean anything. 

My counter point is that folks who haven’t sent something aren’t sub-humans to the ascended masters that aren’t allowed to have opinions as to whether or not something felt easy or hard relative to something else.

If somebody hasn’t sent something - or hasn’t sent something in over a year and has fallen on it since (basically the same as never having sent it in the first place) - just take their opinion with a grain of salt and move on with your life, y’know? 

Bruh, I don't care if people have opinions.  I'm not seeking to stifle anyone's speech or muzzle people.  I'm just saying free ascents because hanging all over a route doesn't give one an accurate assessment of, you know, a free ascent grade.  I don't know what the thread is about, I'm just offering my opinion on the subject so, you know, just take my opinion with a grain of salt, and move on with your life, y'know?  Irony.  

Matthew Jaggerswrote:

I never talk to "everyone at the crag", especially you, Lena. And speculating on a grade of a newly bolted route i haven't climbed yet is not even in the same realm as failing on an established route and saying it's harder than it is. I dont spray about routes, someone asked me what I thought it might be, and I told them. Again, very different than you getting shut down and coming on here to upgrade a route to make yourself feel better.Your anecdote actually proves my point. I thought Cross Contamination was going to be harder, until I spent the time working out the beta and putting it all together.

And no, downgrading is not my concern. Upgrading from people who can't climb a route is my concern.

You certainly did talk to me, snd everyone else, that day. And I had absolutely no problem with you expressing your opinion on the putative route grade of your project to people around you, just like I have no problem with the fact that your initial opinion was wrong.

That is exactly my point. You HAD an opinion. Everyone who tries a route HAS an opinion. They opinion might be “I have no idea how hard this route is”. Or, it could be “this is, for sure, harder than any 12a I had ever tried”. Or, it could be “feels about the same as the 11d I did yesterday”.

I have no problem with people sharing their opinion of the route grade, whenever they feel like sharing it. Just like I have no problem thinking that their opinion (or my opinion) could be wrong. There will be, eventually, a consensus. We accept the opinion of someone who flashed the route in shitty conditions, and opinion of someone who redpointed it in perfect conditions. We accept the opinion of someone who’s been climbing for 30 years, and someone who just got out for the first time, if they are compelled to share it, because the median doesn’t care very much about outliers. If you really care, you can look at who graded that route what, and discount the opinion of anyone who doesn’t meet your criteria for validity.

I have certain rules for how I grade the route, when I grade it. I have no delusion that other peoples criteria are anything like mine. And I’m certainly not going to demand that everyone comply with my rules, however valid I think those rules might be. 

There will be, eventually, a consensus.

That consensus should be comprised of the "have climbeds" and omit the "have not climbeds"

I think we're losing the forest for the trees here. The argument is really quite simple. 

Anyone is entitled to have any opinion they want about the grade of a route. It is entirely within my right to look at a grainy picture of a supposed 5.12 on MP at a crag I will never visit and think to myself, "meh, that looks like old school 5.9+." People can certainly try and fail on routes and still be able to estimate a grade, and even give an informed opinion about the grade. 

The issue is that on MP, when you log a grade for a route, there is the tacit assumption that you are doing so as someone who has climbed it clean, and others may use the cumulative grade info in their decisions as to whether or not to try go for a route onsight, which can even have safety implications. No one is stopping you from having an opinion about anything you want, but it is inherently misleading to log a grade for a climb you haven't climbed clean for that reason - your opinion is being weighed equally with - and perhaps diluting - those who have struggled for the clean ascent and are therefore just inherently better informed about the true difficulty of a clean ascent.