Grading Routes

I’ve given a couple FAs a YDS and a V grade where the crux was super defined and much much harder than the rest of the climbing.  I think the dual grade starts to make more sense on more difficult climbing as on moderate climbing, cruxes are often not as defined.  Ultimately the YDS takes precedent and the V grade is really to give more beta.  As an example, knowing that a 14a has a V10 on it will say a lot about the route.  Also knowing a 14a has nothing harder the V6 but a lot of them says a lot.  It is sorta like an equation.  V10 + 5.12 = 5.14a.  Or V5 + V6 + V8 + 5.12 = 5.14a.  

The YDS system is covering a lot of different styles of climbing and isn’t necessarily perfect at explaining the type of difficulty but it is adequate for being representative of the combined difficulty.

I personally rate my climbs based upon the hardest move.  Of course group consensus plays huge factor of what that hardest move is.

I think rating things harder because its sustained is as bad marker as fitness levels vary wildly. Its not that the move isn't doable, they just don't have the stamina or what be it after X amount of those moves. Some can climb 5.12, others are 5.12 climbers. 

In the end, there will always be a subjective nature in ratings.

Climbs should be graded according to length and seriousness

Grade I One to two hours of climbing

Grade VI A climb lasting 4–6 days 

They should be rated according to difficulty of the crux move unless there's multiple cruxes then it may be a little higher.

Mr Rogerswrote:

I personally rate my climbs based upon the hardest move. 

Coincidentally, the V scale bottoms out well above the routes on your tick list.

Mikey’s post highlights how climbs have been rated for at least the past 30 yrs.

At the heart of the logic is that strength and endurance are highly correlated, given a bit of conditioning for the style.

James Wwrote:

Coincidentally, the V scale bottoms out well above the routes on your tick list.

Mikey’s post highlights how climbs have been rated for at least the past 30 yrs.

At the heart of the logic is that strength and endurance are highly correlated, given a bit of conditioning for the style.

-lol, nice jab. If an MP tick list is what your going to judge one on this forum I can't help that.
But I am not a 5.12 climber, easily admitted. I have at best climbed a handful..... Fox given my tick list doesn't reflect my mediocrity: 0.

-My response was not aimed to anyone in particular but more of a general response to the threads topics... but sure?

Gloweringwrote:

Climbs should be graded according to length and seriousness

Grade I One to two hours of climbing

Grade VI A climb lasting 4–6 days 

They should be rated according to difficulty of the crux move unless there's multiple cruxes then it may be a little higher.

how many .9 cruxes make a .10?

bryanswrote:

Is an 8 move V4 problem followed by 40 feet of 5.9 really a 12a? Maybe, but are you really a 12a climber because you did a 4 move v4? (Looking at you, Jack's Canyon) 

1. Yes

2. There’s a difference between climbing a 5.12a and being a 5.12a climber. 

Not Not MP Adminwrote:

1. Yes

2. There’s a difference between climbing a 5.12a and being a 5.12a climber. 

Ha ha, totally. A friend who has sent plenty of 12a sport says he's still working on being able to call himself a 5.9 climber because there are 5.9 trad pitches out there that he might still hang on if they are wide/slabby/runout/scary/he's not feeling it. Grades are always going to be there, and will always be debated, so it's up to us to define our relationships to grades and understand how they do and don't contribute to our motivation as climbers.

Mr Rogerswrote:

how many .9 cruxes make a .10?

Here is an honest question. How would you grade Goliath? It is a 120’ route that overhangs by maybe 40’. It is consensus benchmark .13a. However, the hardest single move is perhaps V3, maybe V4. So, then it should be graded .11+?  

Perhaps we should just go to French grading with the “obligatory” qualifier like they use on some routes in the Verdon. 

bryanswrote:

Ha ha, totally. A friend who has sent plenty of 12a sport says he's still working on being able to call himself a 5.9 climber because there are 5.9 trad pitches out there that he might still hang on if they are wide/slabby/runout/scary/he's not feeling it. Grades are always going to be there, and will always be debated, so it's up to us to define our relationships to grades and understand how they do and don't contribute to our motivation as climbers.

Absolutely. 

Mr Rogerswrote:

how many .9 cruxes make a .10?

A related example:

Consider that the 140' P2 of Reed's Pinnacle Direct is rated 5.9 but doesn't have a single move harder than 5.7. It also doesn't have a single move easier than 5.7. It's carried that rating since the 60's.

Mr Rogerswrote:

...
I think rating things harder because its sustained is as bad marker as fitness levels vary wildly. Its not that the move isn't doable, they just don't have the stamina or what be it after X amount of those moves. Some can climb 5.12, others are 5.12 climbers....

This makes absolutely zero sense, unless you are talking about routes that are 5.7 or easier. Lolz....

slimwrote:

This makes absolutely zero sense, unless you are talking about routes that are 5.7 or easier. Lolz....

Southern smoke is like v6, must be 12+ :) 

slimwrote:

This makes absolutely zero sense, unless you are talking about routes that are 5.7 or easier. Lolz....

How does this not make sense? As someone else has said, there are no moves on Southern Smoke, for example, close to V11/12, yet is unanimously grade mid 5.14… 

Marc801 Cwrote:

A related example:

Consider that the 140' P2 of Reed's Pinnacle Direct is rated 5.9 but doesn't have a single move harder than 5.7. It also doesn't have a single move easier than 5.7. It's carried that rating since the 60's.

on MP the thing is 10a now. lol. I would consider that pitch to be 5.7/8, but thats me and the way I perceive grading.
A perhaps opposite example is Gingerbread at phantom spires is an example of a 5.7 that I have taken many a person on that climb "harder" than me that thinks its much harder than its given grade... but there is surely no move harder than 5.7 and it is rated so.

Enter "test piece" climbs for a given grade. Do some of those, you know what 5.x grade is for a given area. Subjective nature rears its head again.

I guess crack climbing is a good way to mix this shit up some more. If the crack fits you, that 5.12 may feel 5.10.... is it a 5.12 or a 5.10?

Not Not MP Adminwrote:

How does this not make sense? As someone else has said, there are no moves on Southern Smoke, for example, close to V11/12, yet is unanimously grade mid 5.14… 

i think connor can see what i am saying.  sure, a 1 move V6 route is probably going to get 12+.  100 feet of continuous V6 moves is obviously going to be harder than 12+. a 13a climber is going to be able to send it.

another good example is sustained desert cracks.  a 20 foot tight hands route is going to be around 8 or 9.  a 160 feet of sustained tight hands is going to be obviously a lot harder, probably 12 range.

mr rogers still doesn't seem to get it though. i am wondering how many 5.10's he has hung all over, and then said "feels like 5.8 to me!".  lolz...

grades are based on how hard it is overall to send the route.  whether that be one really hard ass move or 100 moves that just chew away at you.

slimwrote:

grades are based on how hard it is overall to send the route.  whether that be one really hard ass move or 100 moves that just chew away at you.

On the contrary, it has always been my understanding that ratings began as a way to manage the "safety" of the activity. Ratings were originally put on a route based on the single hardest move (back in the day) when the mentality was "the leader must not fall". The thought process was that if you could climb 5.7, you would avoid a route that was 50' of 5.6 climbing with two 5.8 moves because this route was rated 5.8.

It is purely my opinion that this is the way ratings should continue 1. for posterity, and 2. because endurance is a human variable and not one of the rock.

slimwrote:

grades are based on how hard it is overall to send the route.  whether that be one really hard ass move or 100 moves that just chew away at you.

I agree with this

Apparently the gunks do not agree V7 = 5.13-

slimwrote:

1 move V6 …

You generally need 4-6 moves to establish a V grade, though I have seen a few miserable and rare 1 move examples.  Any 1 move on a route can usually be skipped, especially if surrounded by easier climbing.  

The “Vx <-> 5.x” conversions are mostly theoretical, not sure I’ve ever climbed one that would be a benchmark.  

More often the legit V2/3 crux of a 12a gets called V4 by everyone projecting it (edit - also like in the post above…).