Grading Routes Pre-Ascent=NO!

Lena chitawrote:

...
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.

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

It's fun reading these long passionate arguments by people who say they don't really care.

I'm in the don't care camp myself, but I have to wonder ... do you feel a tinge of shame when you are entering the rating on a climb you didn't send? If so, take comfort in the number of likes your posts are getting. What we've learned from this thread is that lots of people are doing it.

A V wrote:

I mean, yeah. You’d be a dummy if you took their grading seriously though. 

MP gives their grading equal weight. That's the OP's point. The counter arguments being made here is that we can all just go through the tick list and filter out the invalid ones, do our own math, etc... It's ridiculous.

All the OP is saying is don't pollute the database with low quality information. 

Don't rate a climb if you didn't send. Don't go on Rotten Tomatoes and rate a movie if you've only watched the trailer.

MP how dare you stalk someone’s ticks also MP how dare you stalk someone figureout they didn’t send and then they graded the route.

Call a route 5.13, 5.12 or 5.11 it doesn’t actually change the difficulty of the climb. People being pissed about feather bagging or sand bagging is just a projection of ego.

Isn't the Red soft though?

Princess Puppy Lovrwrote:

MP how dare you stalk someone’s ticks also MP how dare you stalk someone figureout they didn’t send and then they graded the route.

Call a route 5.13, 5.12 or 5.11 it doesn’t actually change the difficulty of the climb. People being pissed about feather bagging or sand bagging is just a projection of ego.

But the point is it's not just a projection of ego. 

I really couldn't care less how hard someone climbs, and whether they have actually climbed the grade they claim. Someone claiming a 5.14 ascent after hangdogging their way up really doesn't bother me in the slightest from any sort of ego or ethics control perspective. 

For me it comes down to safety: There have been countless times when I'm staring down a hefty runout, or weighing whether or not to go for a dynamic move, where a fall might be unpleasant, when I've told myself "You can do this, it's only 5.xx." I might weigh that decision differently if I knew that some substantial number of people grading it didn't actually complete the move, or just toproped it and didn't have to deal with the pump factor of placing gear, for example. I don't know how likely that particular scenario is, but my point is that there are real-world implications of grades beyond just ego. 

One of the good things about Summit Post is that you were not allowed to add route information unless you climbed the sucker.

It was to keep the information stream pure, you don’t need someone’s opinionated information if that information wasn’t gained first hand.

JohnWesely Weselywrote:

Isn't the Red soft though?

So, I just got back from a 10 day trip to the Red (first time!), and I managed four of my best onsights in years. Because I cannot onsight anything, and because once I am done with them all of my redpoints feel 5.9, I’ll go back and grade all of these 5.8. 5.9- tops. This is fun!

Eliminate grades.

soft cruxwrote:

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

It's fun reading these long passionate arguments by people who say they don't really care.

I'm in the don't care camp myself, but I have to wonder ... do you feel a tinge of shame when you are entering the rating on a climb you didn't send? If so, take comfort in the number of likes your posts are getting. What we've learned from this thread is that lots of people are doing it.

Yes, every noob is entitled to their opinion, too. I would take that opinion for what it’s worth: a noob’s opinion. A noob rating a route they haven’t sent (or the one they DID send, for that matter) is no different than a noob answering a question on MP, and giving advice. Happens all the time. Yet we somehow filter out the noise. This is basically a non-issue. Show me a route where noobs or hangdoggers rating it wildly off-consensus have shifted the actual rating.

As to my personal choice, I generally do not grade the routes I haven’t sent, though I’m sure I have, on some occasions. One exception is if I’m entering a new route into the database. In that case I give it the published guidebook rating, regardless of what I think of it.

I also do not up- or down-grade the route, unless it felt off by more than couple grades; if it felt just a bit harder, or easier, I leave it at consensus, because I don’t think anyone can definitively tell the difference between two letter grades, and a lot of factors, such as conditions, bad beta, or my own fitness (or lack thereof) could easily have an effect of one letter grade. 

Lena chitawrote:

Yes, every noob is entitled to their opinion, too. I would take that opinion for what it’s worth: a noob’s opinion. A noob rating a route they haven’t sent (or the one they DID send, for that matter) is no different than a noob answering a question on MP, and giving advice. Happens all the time. Yet we somehow filter out the noise. This is basically a non-issue. Show me a route where noobs or hangdoggers rating it wildly off-consensus have shifted the actual rating.

As to my personal choice, I generally do not grade the routes I haven’t sent, though I’m sure I have, on some occasions. One exception is if I’m entering a new route into the database. In that case I give it the published guidebook rating, regardless of what I think of it.

I also do not up- or down-grade the route, unless it felt off by more than couple grades; if it felt just a bit harder, or easier, I leave it at consensus, because I don’t think anyone can definitively tell the difference between two letter grades, and a lot of factors, such as conditions, bad beta, or my own fitness (or lack thereof) could easily have an effect of one letter grade. 

You're talking in circles trying to rationalize this. 

Anyone can have their opinion but some opinions are worth more than others (i.e. mine, of course) ... others can just do the work of filtering out misinformed ratings ... it doesn't change things anyway .. the burden of proof is on everyone else to show that my low quality contributions are really a problem... I never enter something different from the consensus anyway ...

The bottom line is that the opinion of a person that sent has value to the community, the opinion of someone that did not send is useless or worse. Why bother doing data entry work when the data is garbage? Everybody is better off when we show a little humility and accept that we aren't qualified to rate something we haven't experienced in the proper style.

soft cruxwrote:

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

I'd like to point out that I included the word "might" followed by a statement about grains of salt. I'm not sure we will ever find a perfectly logical/rational way to grade routes anyway.

@Lena - It's great that you're playing the contrarian, yet literally everything you've said up to this point has reinforced my argument.

@Puppy Lovr - I dont care what people grade a route, sandbag, featherbag, whatever.... just don't do it until you can clip the anchor on lead without falling.

@David Deville - There's always been a perfectly rational way to grade routes... it's whatever you think the route is after you've completed the climb successfully. That was established at the very beginning of climbing, and it has only been recently people seem to have forgotten that not everyone needs their voice to be heard after they try something and fail. I think too many climbers have been through too many equality meetings at the office. If you haven't sent, youre not equal, so keep your uninformed opinion to yourself.

Anyone that "doesn't care" would surely call it lame to grade a Traditional route climbed on TR. How would that person know what it takes to climb the route as intended, leading and placing gear? They wouldn't, and neither would Sporto's who bolt to bolt a route, so save the opinion for your friends at the gym. 

And the "grains of salt" argument is completely counter to the defense of this lameness.

Matthew Jaggerswrote:

@Lena - It's great that you're playing the contrarian, yet literally everything you've said up to this point has reinforced my argument.

@Puppy Lovr - I dont care what people grade a route, sandbag, featherbag, whatever.... just don't do it until you can clip the anchor on lead without falling.

@David Deville - There's already been a perfectly rational way to grade routes... it's whatever you think the route is after you've completed the climb successfully. That was established at the very beginning of climbing, and it has only been recently people seem to have forgotten that not everyone needs their voice to be heard after they try something and fail. I think too many climbers have been through too many equality meetings at the office. If you haven't sent, youre not equal, so keep your uninformed opinion to yourself.

Anyone that "doesn't care" would surely call it lame to grade a Traditional route climbed on TR. How would that person know what it takes to climb the route as intended, leading and placing gear? They wouldn't, and neither would Sporto's who bolt to bolt a route, so save the opinion for your friends at the gym. 

And the "grains of salt" argument is completely counter to the defense of this lameness.

Btw I already did this thread but this one is turning out better (hat tip).

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/106310189/if-you-dont-send-can-you-star-rate-a-route

Tradibanwrote:

Btw I already did this thread but this one is turning out better (hat tip).

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/106310189/if-you-dont-send-can-you-star-rate-a-route

Star ratings are different. You can 'not send' and still "5" star or bomb a route... that truly makes no difference to anyone.

@Tradi - Star ratings are for getting people on a route, or keeping people off a route. Grades are for understanding the difficulty. Those are not the same thing. If you want to star a route after you get shut down and your feelings are hurt, doesn't bother me or anyone else, and it doesn't alter the grade concensus. You know if you "like" a climb after you've tried it, but you don't know how difficult it is until you've sent. See the difference?

Matthew Jaggerswrote:

Star ratings are different. You can 'not send' and still "5" star or bomb a route... that truly makes no difference to anyone.

Whoa now! You absolutely can not star a route unless you've sent. It's the same arbitrary idea as a grade opinion. If you don't think so, how's it different?

Tradibanwrote:

Whoa now! You absolutely can not star a route unless you've sent. It's the same arbitrary idea as a grade opinion. If you don't think so, how's it different?

What about us hangdog specialists? I've been dogging up hard sport climbs for 20+ years, we too can tell how hard a route is and how good it is even if we hang at every other bolt. I say we draw the line at folks who can't actually do the moves, those that stick clip up a route specifically.

Tradibanwrote:

Whoa now! You absolutely can not star a route unless you've sent. It's the same arbitrary idea as a grade opinion. If you don't think so, how's it different?

This is what I don't get. There is no intrinsic difference. He's just making the point that he values accurate difficulty grading over accurate quality grading. And at that, neither method is all that great for determining just how hard or enjoyable the climb will be for you as an individual. I think his argument would be better framed by saying people who can't climb a route don't deserve to have a say in how hard it is. That separates it a bit from the idea that people don't have to send to be able to judge quality. As it stands, all the same arguments used to justify the opinion on grade should absolutely apply to quality, if he was being completely rational about it. 

T Legowrote:

 I think his argument would be better framed by saying people who can't climb a route don't deserve to have a say in how hard it is. That separates it a bit from the idea that people don't have to send to be able to judge quality.

Thats literally exactly what I said.

-mostly agree this “doesn’t matter” and “no one cares” but generally I thought we all liked having at least a ball park idea of how a route compares to others, in terms of difficulty, for planning purposes, safety, courtesy at crag, etc 

-it would be cool to have everyone keep posting grade opinions regardless of send status, but to make the database have more interesting data, have it differentiate the grade consensus from those who have sent on lead, those who have sent on TR or follow, and those who haven’t sent or are working the route. I think that may show some interesting patterns. The problem is the format for how you enter stars and grades was established a long time ago, and isn’t connected to the tick database, so I think that ship has sailed.

-I used to star and grade everything I got on in the early days of waaaay back in 2017 Lol, and then on my own, came to the conclusion one day that, for my own ethics/style maybe I should stop doing that unless I’ve sent. I don’t think that opinion matters, and it doesn’t bother me if someone else has a different one.

-I flailed REALLY bad on a famous harder crack route (on TR of course) in Josh earlier this year. To me it would be ridiculous to assign a number to it. Might as well call it 5.19 for me. If enough things went right for many many many years maybe I would have a chance to send, and in that case I would probably agree with the consensus. So my opinion doesn’t matter for that routes grade, nor is it needed. That’s an extreme example, and doesn’t sound like the person that climbs something, but hung a few times, but knows they could send next session, and has many ticks in the same grade range already. All that to say, I see Majas point, as well as Lenas 

-I see why folks like the hide ticks feature. I don’t use it, cause I mostly agree with the literally no one cares, and my friends can see what I’m up to in terms of sends or sieges. That said, it seems like plenty of folks on here love to use them as a cudgel, deservedly or not 

-Compelling topic, how we perceive difficulty in our climbing, how we attach ego to that, having opinions (on anything really), the need to share those opinions or not, whether all those opinions are needed or not, how we handle disagreement, all on display 

In all seriousness, I think that Americans are too hung up on grades. In most other places, unless it is too egregiously off, a route remains the grade that that the FA assigned. If it is stout, one just shrugs and moves on. If soft, you take the grade (and move on).  A good example of this are some of the historical routes around Arco. The routes that are less than 6c are so polished that they are nearly unclimbable, and are often harder that the 7a/7b routes, but nobody bothers to upgrade these or to downgrade the allegedly harder ones. And there you have it. A 6a will be harder than a 7a, but nobody really gives a shit.