Enter Sandboard

Take my hand / we're off to never-Kilterland

So, what do you think is the sandiest board of all? Props to anyone who has tried the 2010 yellow-only Moonboard.

Of the ones I've tried, I would rank them this way, from stoutest to softest:

mmb20

mmb25

Decoy

MB16

TB1

Kilter

Mb16 and tb1 flipped.

Throw grasshopper 8x10 no tweeners above decoy

mb 25

tb2

mb 16

tb1

and then obviously kilter

Am I reading these ranks correctly? I’ve never before heard someone call the TB1 less sandbagged than the TB2. I think we all agree on the kilter though. I suppose I haven’t climbed on a ton of distinct boards:

TB1

TB2

Kilter

I’ve climbed on a couple of the MBs but not recently enough to have a useful opinion on relative difficulty 

It will be interesting to see the divergence of answers on this. I think a lot of the responses will be based on personal climbing style. I don't find the TB or MB to be particularly sandbagged because I prefer technical shoulder/core intensive movements but find the "jumpy" style of the Kilter very difficult as I have a -3 in. reach. I also think we should standardize an angle for arguments sake, as wood holds seem to be a lot more difficult at steeper angles.

Bolting Karen wrote:

. I also think we should standardize an angle for arguments sake, as wood holds seem to be a lot more difficult at steeper angles.

40, for sure. Although it's fun to jug-bash steeper. Another variable is that there's a big difference between problems on the Mini and something is big as the Decoy dungeon trainer 12 x 12. Some of the longer problems on the latter end up feeling like routes.

It seems like TB1 enjoys a bit of notoriety, but I find that the lack of variety of holds makes it very straightforward to read. The founders called it a campus board with LEDs, right? Still good for developing power, fingerstrength and tension with those terrible glassy feet, but not a lot of unlocking.

I have a short 35 degree TB1 in my garage and it’s brutal. My long inflexible legs don’t play well with the 6-inch kickboard, and the garage is not climate controlled. I can climb harder on basically any board in the gym. 

Woods (like a couple more sandbags!)

TB2

Moon 19

Moon 16 

TB1

Kilter

(No experience on Decoy or Moonboard 24 and too little time on Grasshopper for a valid opinion )

scn wrote:

Woods (like a couple more sandbags!)

I've never seen one of these in the wild. How is it? The website's description of their use of dualtex reminded me of how the Decoy forces precise footwork with small contact patches on otherwise large holds.

For those unfamiliar with the Decoy, I find it to be a delightful mix of the training utility of Moon and the fun factor of Kilter. Given unlimited space and spend, it's what I would build (haven't tried TB2 yet though, seems like that has a bigger following).

Regardling the Woods Board:

Full disclosure I’ve only had 3 sessions on it at PRG Beaverton.  My opinion is that it’s super challenging.  I think it is hard in a TB2 kind of way but with even more, and even smaller wood crimps. But maybe slightly better feet in some cases. 

If I climbed V10 (I top out around 7B/+ both outside and on boards) I think it would really open up more options for actually training on it.  The plastic holds feel more slick to me, I would agree with the Woods website that the texture feels similar to a wood hold, so that is tricky if you’re not ready for it.  But that is likely more skin friendly.  There are a LOT of holds on it which is cool and opens up options for dumbing down a problem to work it.

From most to least sandbagged:
MB 16 (Benchmarks)
TB1 (Classics)
TB2 (Classics)
>>>
Kilter (most repeated climbs)

I pretty much only climb on the TB2 when I'm indoors. Surprised people are saying TB2 is more sandbagged than MB 16. I don't have a ton of time on the MB 16 but I remember some of the benchmarks feeling much more sandbagged than the same grade of TB2 Classics.

Prav C wrote:

From most to least sandbagged:
MB 16 (Benchmarks)
TB1 (Classics)
TB2 (Classics)
>>>
Kilter (most repeated climbs)

I pretty much only climb on the TB2 when I'm indoors. Surprised people are saying TB2 is more sandbagged than MB 16. I don't have a ton of time on the MB 16 but I remember some of the benchmarks feeling much more sandbagged than the same grade of TB2 Classics.

Good to point out that we are comparing benchmarks and classics.  That is what I was assuming we were using as a reference.  (Because so many other problems on the apps are way off in either direction on difficulty)

I guess my take is that likely Moonboard 16 benchmarks feel less difficult for the grade for me personally than TB2 classics because I have way more time on the Moonboard.

For me all the boards except the Kilter board have grades such that whatever difficulty I want to climb, I can't easily find that difficulty on the problems because the grades are so wildly (and often/typically purposely) inconsistent. It works fine if I want to find things I can do in 1-3 tries, but if I want limit boulders (so if I want to build power and get stronger) all the boards except the Kilter are severely lacking due to their purposeful and bad theory of grading.  To be fair, the Kilter has plenty of that too, its just easy to see past it to the consistent stuff for whatever reason.  

Aside from the Kilter, the system boards are great for demonstrating strength and power built in other places, and they are great for filling out volume on sub-limit bouldering or for creating routes using multiple easy problems, but they are positively worthless for limit bouldering unless you obsess over them and familiarize yourself with every problem, and who wants to do that.  A well set spraywall is a better training tool than anything else for limit bouldering.