New and experienced climbers over 50 #38

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

I am somewhere between 3 and 4.. gud enough that most of my Eastern partners expect me to get the rope up the wide pitches. Bad enough to get spanked occasionally. 

Ha!  I'd say I'm smart enough to hand the rack to my Western partners when the next pitch is wide.

Dragons, I'd say "wide" starts at offwidth and goes up from there.  So yes, chimneys are considered "wide".  Though no-one would say you're a wide oficcionado unless you can claw yourself up an OW that is too wide for fists and too narrow for knees. 

Sad to hear about Ron O.  I climbed with him once or twice.  He was fun, a prolific FAist in the desert, and a real character.  He will be greatly missed.

GO

Ward Smith · 22 hours ago · Wendell MA · Joined Oct 2020 · Points: 26

  I have posted my political opinions on here before but will not do so again.  I am guessing that nobody has ever changed  their mind based upon something that they read here.  So, essentially we are jerking off when posting politics.  Nothing wrong with jerking off, I’ve been doing it since I was 13.  But to think that you are making a difference by doing it is delusional.

Speaking for myself, discussing politics doesn't come from the expectation that anyone's mind is going to be changed- it's more about discussing issues and observations about political processes that have clear influence on my own life, community, and others in this country. As I've stated in the past, climbers are a good group of people to discuss this kind of stuff with, as they are often articulate and sharp, and have insights I don't find in other social groups. Indeed, if you are discussing politics predominantly because you expect minds to be changed, you are doing it wrong.

This said, I'm also quite willing to be sensitive to a group dynamic if there is virtual consensus about how a group operates. While there are certainly many who prefer not to discuss politics, there are clearly a number of them who find it acceptable, and participate regularly. Should a full consensus come into effect about what is acceptable to discuss in this thread, I would certainly respect it.

I just spent a weekend with Keesee.  He is a complete Maga supporter.  I am not.  At the same time, I am not much left of center either.  We often don't discuss politics but we did a little this weekend.  He has some interesting insights but also lets the small changes distract from the large things that need to change.  But then I am a political absurdist and assume anyone in politics is corrupt long before they get to DC, so my expectations of meaningful change for the common man are pretty tiny.

Thanks for the responses to my query.

Dragons, 

wide cracks, or offwidths start at about 4” and go up to about 12” where they become squeeze chimneys. While chimneys are indeed wide cracks most of us differentiate between chimneys and offwidths because the techniques to climb them are different. Chimneys are generally easier, more secure and on the thinner ones generally more knee intensive. Offwidths on the other hand, require a whole bag of different ways of jamming parts of both lower and upper extremities to fill a 4 to 12 inch space, which for me anyway, required a fair amount of practice to master such a repertoire. As soon as your jams start slipping you're usually screwed, so mileage is key to figuring out what works and being able to execute consistently without blood loss. 

Norm & Gabe,

Do you guys find that you have to include offwidths in your climbing on a fairly regular basis to stay dialed? I certainly do, cuz if I don’t do any ow for an extended time I seem to at least momentarily slip back into what feels like a #3 type experience.

Edit for Lori,

Here's a fist crack I put up called Cruel Fister, somehow I think you wouldn't like it much.

Fossil, it’s been a year or so since I had my last true wide experience. There was a route that I saw that just looked wild and I had to see what it involved. It was a bolted 1/2 tube of granite. It involved all the wide tricks I could summon. There was no way to protect it so it remained unclimbed until recently when it now seems it’s Ok to bolt everything.
It started with simple bridging that was really hard to get out of to start stemming. Then as the tube narrowed it became chicken wings on the arm and overhung frictiony smearing for the feet then the tube opened again to wide bridging before ending in an 8” flaring crack to the belay. I was worked! I think i got PTSD from that pitch. I was comatose that evening and totally crushed/sore for two days.
It was a great memorable pitch and I can’t wait to do it again this fall when things cool down again...

Nick Goldsmithwrote:

I just saw a blip about Letchworth State Park in upstate NY and it looked in the picture to have some big cliffs? looked very much like the Gunks. 

I grew up in Rochester and have been to Letchworth many times on visits "back east" since I started climbing in '99. Trust me, I was hoping to find anything climbable, known or unknown. Sadly none of the rock is anything you would or could actually climb. Same with the gorges towards Ithaca. I do hear there is some under-the-radar ice climbing in the area, though.

The pictures looked great! Oh well.. 

This was the best hard OW that I have done in the east. Some kind of gnarly desert 10 complete with crumbly rock . A full 30m pitch. 

It must have been done in two pitches originally? because these were in the first pod/stance

We did not know who put it up but we called it Zion Dreams.  just the old manky anchors in the first cave/pod and good bolts at the top 30m up. Fragile rock, crumbly rock good rock sharp blocky stuff, sandy stuff and the wide. It really felt like a desert climb just the wrong color.  Top anchors survived the chopping spree at Holts.  It takes up to a #5

apogeewrote:

Ward Smith · 22 hours ago · Wendell MA · Joined Oct 2020 · Points: 26

Speaking for myself, discussing politics doesn't come from the expectation that anyone's mind is going to be changed- it's more about discussing issues and observations about political processes that have clear influence on my own life, community, and others in this country. As I've stated in the past, climbers are a good group of people to discuss this kind of stuff with, as they are often articulate and sharp, and have insights I don't find in other social groups. Indeed, if you are discussing politics predominantly because you expect minds to be changed, you are doing it wrong.

This said, I'm also quite willing to be sensitive to a group dynamic if there is virtual consensus about how a group operates. While there are certainly many who prefer not to discuss politics, there are clearly a number of them who find it acceptable, and participate regularly. Should a full consensus come into effect about what is acceptable to discuss in this thread, I would certainly respect it.

Original thoughts are especially appreciated, regurgitating things verbatim from our bootlicking press definitely deserves to be called out 100% of the time anyplace and anywhere. I also prefer to hear what people actually think way more than coming to a safe and apathetic place where everyone has a perfect life(Instagram).

I was listening to some journalist talking about NYC today for instance. They had done some research and found that NYC has more millionaires than any city on the planet, something like 300k+ of them. The same city also has the most people living below the poverty line than any city in the country. Seems to me a perfect example of politicians licking way more rich boots than the folks who actually voted them into their offices.

apogeewrote:

Ward Smith · 22 hours ago · Wendell MA · Joined Oct 2020 · Points: 26

Speaking for myself, discussing politics doesn't come from the expectation that anyone's mind is going to be changed- it's more about discussing issues and observations about political processes that have clear influence on my own life, community, and others in this country. As I've stated in the past, climbers are a good group of people to discuss this kind of stuff with, as they are often articulate and sharp, and have insights I don't find in other social groups. Indeed, if you are discussing politics predominantly because you expect minds to be changed, you are doing it wrong.

This said, I'm also quite willing to be sensitive to a group dynamic if there is virtual consensus about how a group operates. While there are certainly many who prefer not to discuss politics, there are clearly a number of them who find it acceptable, and participate regularly. Should a full consensus come into effect about what is acceptable to discuss in this thread, I would certainly respect it.

I agree it's unlikely anyone who engages in online political discussions is going to change their views as a result of said discussions. But that's true of opinion writers, talk show guests, podcasters etc. The interactions can still serve a useful purpose to inform people who aren't as politically involved, but sometimes those same people want to avoid discussions because they can become divisive. I understand this but suspect it arises because such people don't think they will personally be affected much. For me that insight into their character is valuable. 

M Mwrote:

Original thoughts are especially appreciated, regurgitating things verbatim from our bootlicking press definitely deserves to be called out 100% of the time anyplace and anywhere. I also prefer to hear what people actually think way more than coming to a safe and apathetic place where everyone has a perfect life(Instagram).

I was listening to some journalist talking about NYC today for instance. They had done some research and found that NYC has more millionaires than any city on the planet, something like 300k+ of them. The same city also has the most people living below the poverty line than any city in the country. Seems to me a perfect example of politicians licking way more rich boots than the folks who actually voted them into their offices.

Well NYC has a population more than twice that of any other city in the US. So it's not surprising it would have more of both rich and poor people by absolute numbers. If you look at poverty rates though it's not particularly bad.

fossilwrote:

Norm & Gabe,

Do you guys find that you have to include offwidths in your climbing on a fairly regular basis to stay dialed? I certainly do, cuz if I don’t do any ow for an extended time I seem to at least momentarily slip back into what feels like a #3 type experience.

Edit for Lori,

Here's a fist crack I put up called Cruel Fister, somehow I think you wouldn't like it much.

The fist crack looks deliciously evil. Especially the pods.  For the rest of it it's hard to tell if it's featured enough to make it relatively comfy or not. I'm guessing not. 

As for OW, it's like anything else: use it or lose it. Off the couch I have a good base, but no finesse. 

GO

Until maybe 20 years ago, or so, I did occasionally try and climb some off-widths. I wanted to be a well-rounded climber. and some climbs I liked involved off-width parts. For example, the hard part for me on my first route on Chimney Rock (nice climb that apparently has fallen off) in Northern Idaho was maybe 40 or 50 continuous feet of what people called 5.9 off-width (wider than fists, but my feet jammed in felt pretty secure most of the time) . The 5.10 layback crux felt like walk in the park. I never was good at, or practiced, technical off-width stuff, and mainly just managed to scrap my way up when I encountered it on climbs. I did like the physicality, but mainly felt insecure, because I didn't know WTF I was doing, and also didn't have much, or maybe even any big gear for protection.  I did once manage to onsight a short 5.11 offwidth in LCC (easy for the grade? I could look for the name in the MP data base, I suppose) but I cheated: squeezing up to get gear as high as possible, then squeezing back down to come out and lay back around the crux. I was light-years away from ever being close to a 5.11 off-width climber! Now I live in Balcarce, where roofs abound, but you'd have to search high and low to find an off-width. Like Clint Eastwood said: "A man's got to know his limitations". Cheers fossil

Edit to add: for whatever it's worth, looking at the MP data base, apparently the route I'm talking about on Chimney Rock was undamaged by the rockfall

fossilwrote:

Some of us out here on the active margin only climb cracks and will only do slabs and face climbs if we have to in order to get to the next section of crack.

But since we are talking cracks, where do you all stand on the wide ones? 

Here are some possible scenarios, but feel free to add a category if these don’t cover…

1.Avoid them like the plague

2.Will only follow if someone else leads it

3.Will do them if you have to, but it won’t be pretty

4.Treat it just like any other crack and master the technique required to do them without suffering

5.Get fanatical about them to where it is mostly what you do

6.Regularly goad your friends into leading them so you can watch them suffer and laugh at them

7.Start a climbers forum called Wide fetish

I myself fall in the number #4 category and occasionally venture into #6. I have never been shy about getting on them, but it has really been in the last three years that I feel I’ve gained mastery at them. This was aided by the fact that I found a number of quality offwidths that had not been climbed, so I figured I best get to where they are fun to do so I could snatch them up and include them in the regular circut

I went though a period when I actually sought out off width cracks. I started thinking of them as close quarter bridging and love stemming and bridging problems.

fossilwrote:

Thanks for the responses to my query.

Dragons, 

wide cracks, or offwidths start at about 4” and go up to about 12” where they become squeeze chimneys. While chimneys are indeed wide cracks most of us differentiate between chimneys and offwidths because the techniques to climb them are different. Chimneys are generally easier, more secure and on the thinner ones generally more knee intensive. Offwidths on the other hand, require a whole bag of different ways of jamming parts of both lower and upper extremities to fill a 4 to 12 inch space, which for me anyway, required a fair amount of practice to master such a repertoire. As soon as your jams start slipping you're usually screwed, so mileage is key to figuring out what works and being able to execute consistently without blood loss.

Okay, I see what you mean, thanks! I don't have much experience with those. I've gone up some chimneys in the Gunks, but they don't really count (e.g. the difficulty with Belly Roll is escaping the squeeze chimney after you get inside it). I think Easy Keyhole might count as an off-width, at least at the bottom of P1. There's Keyhole as well, but I've never tried that (7+, beyond my pay grade).

Emil Briggswrote:

I agree it's unlikely anyone who engages in online political discussions is going to change their views as a result of said discussions. But that's true of opinion writers, talk show guests, podcasters etc. The interactions can still serve a useful purpose to inform people who aren't as politically involved, but sometimes those same people want to avoid discussions because they can become divisive. I understand this but suspect it arises because such people don't think they will personally be affected much. For me that insight into their character is valuable. 

Can I paraphrase what you're saying Emil? Then you can correct me if I'm wrong. You seem to be saying

(1) Ordinary people (with no specific expertise, just voicing opinions) should publicly engage in political discussions.
(2) You find it useful for them to do so, because it informs other people who aren't politically involved.
(3) And then you go on to say that "the same people ["ordinary people" of (1)] want to avoid discussions because they can become divisive" and that such people "don't think they will personally be affected much".

That's my takeaway from what you wrote. If I have misinterpreted, please clarify. I would like to respond, but don't want to without being sure of your meaning.

On another not, Bill and I got out on "No Picnic" very early this morning. It's really no picnic!
I guess I have to lead this at some point, but I find the crux rather intimidating, and the pro is iffy there. Here I am way above that area:

The line used to be 5.4 and went around the left.  I think sandy holds led to it being re-routed to the right and over that 5.5 crux.  Either way, it is aptly named.

BITD Photo bump to stay active in the new thread.

Leading the FA of a 2 pitch 5.9 on an obscure crag in Plumas County California 1977.

Route probably hasn't seen a second ascent.

dragonswrote:

Can I paraphrase what you're saying Emil? Then you can correct me if I'm wrong. You seem to be saying

(1) Ordinary people (with no specific expertise, just voicing opinions) should publicly engage in political discussions.
(2) You find it useful for them to do so, because it informs other people who aren't politically involved.
(3) And then you go on to say that "the same people ["ordinary people" of (1)] want to avoid discussions because they can become divisive" and that such people "don't think they will personally be affected much".

That's my takeaway from what you wrote. If I have misinterpreted, please clarify. I would like to respond, but don't want to without being sure of your meaning.

OK not quite what I was getting at. Lets try it this way addressing each of your points in turn.

1. The choice of whether or not to engage in political discussion is up to each individual. I'm not saying they should or shouldn't. But the reality is that lots of people don't. Which is OK. 

2. The people who do choose to engage can provide insight to those who don't. Of course that only works if the lurkers are paying attention. Some do and some don't and that's true for traditional news sources as well as online forums like this.

3. Some people avoid conflict or disagreements. This can happen for different reasons. One is the person just doesn't care about the issue. To give it a climbing flavor if someone either hates or loves Tri-cams I may crack a joke but I'm not going to get worked up about it and I won't get into an argument over it. Another reason is that individual has a personality that avoids conflict even over things that matter to them. That's not always a good thing and not just in politics but yes I know people like that who I care deeply about.

Edit to get around post limit.
Gabe I was not referring to you or anyone in particular. But I'm curious about this comment of yours "Get out and do something or STFU". I do. I just don't talk about most of it here. And when I look on my posts with a political content they almost always come in response to someone else. I virtually never initiate them and yeah even though I try to resist the urge sometimes I get sucked in.

My comment about people avoiding discussions is based on my lived experience but yeah I'm fully aware that not everyone has the same motivations so my apologies if you thought I was targeting you. 

What the politards fail to recognize and understand is this: this forum is not a political talking head show. You are not providing any service here to anyone, except yourself. I certainly don't come here to read any of yalls political thoughts - ever.