Guidebooks: likes and dislikes?

I’ve found L-R makes the most sense for me even for crags that I enter from the right. Echo the comments on historical section and local ethics/culture and detailed approach beta. 

MattHwrote:

Every time a guidebook author says 'cams to 3"' I have to guess whether they think a BD #3 is 3" (it's not) or they actually meant 3".

It is 3" though...

A short geology section is a nice feature. I like to know what I'm climbing on. A great example is Jason Nelson's Ouray guidebook which has 7 pages on geology with a basic geological map and short descriptions of the main formations that have climbing.

Jay Knowerwrote:

Dislikes:

• Slash grades (even worse: slash numbers)

Why? Tanya Bok’s books are all effectively slash grades (actually -/even/+) and I really dug that. Not like there’s a meaningful difference between 5.#a and 5.#a/b anyways.

I greatly appreciate a section In the back by the glossary showing a few must-do routes at each grade. 

I prefer a unique numbering system. Each route in the book gets its own number.

Quality construction. Good editing. Cover the basics on information but tell me a good story or two as well.

Rad photos that inspire us to do that other route, not the one that everyone's lined up for.

Local flora and fauna.  Climbing history.  Stoke.

Slash grades are worse than useless. 

desert rock is the most perfect guidebook ever made for those wanting an adventurous day (and maybe night) where the outcome isn't certain

needles of rushmore is the most perfect guidebook ever made for those wanting an incredible weekend of cragging

Positive: guide books in general…love them.  And Gunks App!

Thanks for writing them!!

Agreeing with all the above who mentioned fluff! I love reading books in preparation for a trip, and it's a lot better when I can get a sense of the local region, culture, what makes that crag special.

Bouldering guidebooks often have lists like "top 100", "best slabs", "best highballs", etc, or circuits listed if you want to hit a bunch of classics or crimpy routes or stuff like that. I've only read a handful of route books, but it's something I've missed in all of them. Would love to see some circuit-equivalents, stuff like "you're here for a week and want to feel what [area] is like" or "best balancey technical routes" or "best comfy handjams".

Good use of really precise adjectives to describe features on the rock. See the Watts guide for Smith Rock. Super helpful if you’re wondering if you’re on route and then a particularly memorable word from the topo or route description pops into your head to confirm.

Also including history of the native peoples in that area in the history & geology sections. 

Dislike: the not accurate geology. Often misleading by taking Metamorphic rock as Igneus. The extended comments on each route about the "fun" of the route agains actual gear beta or attention to specifics in sections where pro is compromised by a broken system on the crack or so.

Like: The respect for the area encouraging climbers to be respectful of neighbours and LNT. Also the availability of guide books. Where i come from there is hardly 1 guide and usually outdated.

Needs:

1) A good map showing the entire area and, if appropriate, smaller maps for each sub-area. I function with spacial orientation, and need the broad overviews to orient myself, even if other methods will suffice.

2) Routs need to be listed left to right regardless of where the approach trail comes up. Otherwise it's disorienting.

3) Sun/shade information for each area/crag/face. Icons and bars with a timeline are simple and effective.

4) Historical information about the area and climbers that goes beyond FAs. Essays and background information such as climbing eras, developments, changes, interactions with locals/agencies, sensitive issues, and such give users a perspective for the area and hopefully a sense of being part of the community.

5) Section on geology.

Other:

1) I agree that the use of inches for gear size is ambiguous and shouldn't be used - even if there's a clear statement by the author and a conversion table displayed. Better to consistently use Camalot sizing since it's most universally known.

2) If the term "standard rack" is used it needs to be clearly defined.

3) Don't over use "standard rack" and don't use it as a vague catch all. If the gear isn't known then state as such or be more vague w/o details such as "hands to OW".

4) Tailor descriptions of each route with pertinent information like: "route wonders - be careful of rope drag", protecting the second on the traverse is impractical", "runout at the crux", "trad gear needed between bolts", "beware of pigeons", "liberal bolting and good for leaders at their limit", etc. 

Final thoughts:

1) How much beta to include for moves and techniques, and to some degree trad gear details, is for the author to decide. There will always be dissenters in both directions.

2) In general, a guide book should make it feel like you're climbing with a friend showing you his favorite area, rather than just a listing if the climbs.

Kevin DeWeese wrote:

Receiving this guide in the last week or so was the very thing that cemented this feeling for me.

I would not be adverse to splitting a book for an area like Tuolumne into multiple volumes. Make a single “select” version for those just passing through, and a two volume comprehensive with topos and overlays for those of us that want to venture out into obscurities.

Granted, the guidebook market is already impossible to make work economically so I understand that multiple volumes and a select version prob makes the profit even smaller (or more likely, the loss even larger) 

I was thinking the same thing and 100% agree. Photo overlays are fine for single pitch and sport crags, but if any sort of route finding is in the mix, topos are mandatory. Imagine setting off up the Nose of El Cap with your only topo being a line drawn straight up the prow on a photo. A hand drawn topo on a napkin by some drunk dude in the Mountain Room the night before would be more useful. 

-Not common, but I really like in areas w/ dangerous climbing, include the difficulty of the dangerous climbing in parenthesis i.e. 5.10 (5.8R), some older Gunks guidebooks and Adirondack Rock have this. 

-Some sort of overview page to tell you where to climb seasonally (if it matters in your area), or specific criteria (wide grade range, rainy etc.). The Squamish guide has a great example of this.

Echoing others:

- Routes should always be listed L->R. This makes it easy to cross reference crag pics, the route list, and your actual view of the crag.   

- The most important part of the guidebook is approach/descent beta. I've bought guidebooks purely for a single page, which is the area overview map, because I was getting so goddamned lost trying to use MP. Detailed maps, detailed written instructions, GPS coordinates, instructions on waypoints and overshoots, useful pictures, etc. Beta test your beta by giving it to a travelling gumby and asking for feedback - when I see the word "obvious" in approach/descent beta, I just assume I'm getting sandbagged at this point.

- Multiple indexes. Index all climbs and crags by name, and index climbs by grade. Super annoying to have to flip through endless pages to find a particular climb because I can't remember what section of a long wall it is on. Star ratings next to climbs in the by-grade index so I can get a quick idea for routes I'd like to tick on a trip.

- Recommendations for areas based on grade/style/objectives is great, as is route recommendations for grade/style. Helpful for travelling climbers to know how to spend their time, and as a local climber, it is fun to have a series of benchmarks to chase for each grade and style in the area to feel like I am gradually mastering the various skills the area demands.

- It's okay to note 90% of climbs with "SR", but you need to spell out what a standard rack is for the area. Put this info in the TOC and index so we can easily find it. Future-proof your gear beta by noting both actual sizes and sizes of the most popular gear brands at the time of writing - it's always annoying to guess if an old guidebook author is talking about sizes for WC, old Camelots, or new C4s. 

- I'm split on history/anecdotes/etc. I enjoy reading it, but it becomes annoying if it makes an already big book even bulkier. I wish there was a way to keep all that info, but then remove it when I'm trying to stuff the book into my already overstuffed pack. 

- Finally, include a diverse grade range in your glamor shots. It was always disheartening as a 5.10 climber to flip though a guidebook to get stoked for a largely 5.10/5.11 area, and only see pictures of people climbing 5.13. Any halfway decent climbing photographer can get dramatic, harrowing, and beautiful shots of a 5.6. 

For USA - the Bechtel, Lander guidebook is a great model in my opinion

Here are my wishes of guidebooks

• Proof read more than you think is needed!  Do it a million times, go to the crag, stand at the bottom of each route - go there in different seasons for different foliages for visibility and descriptions.  Find it in your book by the sector, find it by looking it up in the index, find it by looking for it in the tick log.  Make sure each route at every sector is marked and referenced correctly in the guidebook.  Countless guidebook don't do this basic editorial review - routes are off by 10 pages in the index, they are mismarked on the pictures etc.  Proof proof proof read and review with multiple editors.  The whole point off a guidebook is to GUIDE us to the area, to the sector, to the route.  Give the book to a complete non-climber, never visited newbie and have them find the routes.  Edit and proof read to have the guidebook be the best guide literature for the area.  Please!
• My preference - up charge for no corporate ads in the book, keep it all about the climbing
• My preference - cut the fluff - cut the weight.  We don't need 30 pages about the pioneers.  Make a separate book "about the crag" or please minimize this content.  If it's worth the 30pages in the book, I'm sure more can be written and made into a coffee table instead of adding pack weight.  The euro model (from what I've seen in CH) is all about the climbing and tries to keep the guidebooks to guiding with minimizing weight to reduce heft for approaches to places like Gastlosen, etc.
• My preference - supplement pictures of sectors and routes with good hand drawings with high contrast black and white
• Left to right text, left to right images.  The Rico Shelfroad guidebook drives me insane with its right to left! (it's also an example of bad editing/proofing for indexing and images matched to routes)
• For images of climbers on routes - in addition to the climber and photographer credit, please caption the photo with route name, grade, page number or guidebook route # so we can find it.  If you want to showcase it for us, let us find it easily
• Page and print quality - make it pen friendly please and leave a little room by the route descriptions or blank pages for sector notes at the end of the book.  A lot of us take guiding notes in our guidebooks, so we prefer pages that will last and will take ink without bleeding or smearing easily
• My preference - tick boxes in the index and next to routes in the book itself next to route descriptions.  onsight/flash on left, send on the right
• If including stars - make sure the stars align with whatever baseline calibration you are using and say that in the book in your preference.  Eg: if you're going by MP star ratings at time of Month/Year - say that and let us know where you're getting the star ratings from.  Same with grades, either from the FA or the MP month/year

I'll edit/update this post if I think of more. 

Thanks so much for asking the community

• L to R ordering
• Distinction between trad and sport routes by color in the route name and on topo line
• Seasonal sun aspect info for wall
• Anchor detail per pitch for multipitch routes (ex: gear anchor and bolted anchor)
• Clearly marked descent info for multipitch routes
• High resolution topo photos
• Page numbers for areas listed on  summary page photos or overview maps
• Page number listed on any photos showing someone climbing a route if not on the same page as the route info

For the route finding beta, it seems like some people like that, some people don’t. Maybe you could “hide” that for multipitch climbs by putting it on a separate page/section? I.e. see page xxx for detailed route beta

I prefer well drawn topos most of the time, and always for multipitch. A few high quality photos to give the general cliff layout is nice too. 

If using photos for single pitch areas, make sure they're good enough quality to show all of the cliff's features. Make the route lines thin and dashed.  

Also, L to R always... unless written in Hebrew or Arabic of course. 

I guess I'm in the minority that I want a guidebook to be just a guidebook, and not a $60 coffee table book that doubles as a guidebook. I do love reading all the "fluff" that people are talking about, but I only read it once. After that it's just extra space and weight in my pack. A separate booklet for that would be nice. Apart from the poor photo quality, books like the Falcon Guides to Tahquitz/Suicide (3rd ed.) and Tuolumne (4th ed.) are my favorites. Though the latest North Tahoe guide did a good job for a more photo-based book, especially compared to the "locals" guide it replaced.

As someone who primarily climbs in the southeast, which has terrible weather 80% of the time…

-Sun aspect: good to know so you can chase shady crags on warm days or sunny crags on cold days

-Dry time: it rains constantly in the southeast. Knowing how quickly a crag drys out can make the difference between switching areas or outright cancelling a trip