What's more impressive? Soloing? Or Onsighting?

I contend that, all else being relatively equal, on-sighting is a more impressive accomplishment than soloing.

With a reasonable solo, success is presumed.
You only get one chance. If you blow it, you're dead.
"Survival is not assured." Of course. That's life. That's driving to the grocery store for to stock the pantry to feed the kids.
Any attempted solo where success was not presumed a near-certainty is an act of literal insanity. In-sane. Not healthy.
Watching someone fight to succeed on a solo is a deeply upsetting visual.
Soloing at one's limit is the act of a madman.

With a reasonable on-sight, success is not assured.
You only get one chance. If you blow it, you're still alive, but have to live the rest of your life carrying the memory of the reality of that failure.
Survival is imperative. Life is perilous enough already. There's more to life than climbing rocks.
Any attempted on-sight where success is presumed guaranteed is effectively YABWO - Yet Another Boring Warmup Onsight.
Watching someone fight to succeed on an on-sight is a deeply impressive and inspiring visual.
Onsighting at one's limit is the work of an ubermensch.

--

What's more - futzing with protective gear and worrying about risk of dangerous falls vs wasting energy placing pro takes "safe" onsighting to the next level of difficulty.

e.g.:
If I told you that Alex Honnold rolled into town and free solo'ed The Naked Edge after rehearsing it on rope 7 or 8 times -- Cool. Yeah. He climbs 5.14 and is missing some standard emotional circuitry in his brain, and loves to solo stuff because he loves climbing and it makes him feel badass. What else is new?

If I told you that my buddy Mike, who has never climbed harder than 5.12c, managed to on-sight Ten Digit Dialing, and was screaming like hell through the crux and his feet popped off 3 times but he managed to stay on and control the barn door, and he had to reverse a couple moves when he botched a sequence, and then he ended up skipping the next 2 clips (safe enough to likely survive, but still scary) and threw a monstrously committed desperate dyno to snag the final sloper jug and claim on-sight victory for a climb with the same YDS grade as his hardest red-point yet...

Gah DAMN! Mike is the kind of guy I want in my foxhole as a battle buddy and in my wedding party as a groomsman.

Soloing 5.10 is not all that impressive for the 5.14 climber. The only way the 5.14 climber fails on a 5.10 is if they lose their cool or are interfered with by some external factor. 

---

The 5.9 climber should be more impressed by their 5.11 climbing mentor on-sighting a 5.10d in battle-mode than they should be impressed by 5.13 climbers having a chill time soloing 5.9's that the 5.9'er finds intimidating.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Debate and dialogue welcome and encouraged but
(1) play kindly
(2) show your work. defend your position with rational arguments and logical reasoning. cite your references clearly.
(3) please keep the irony/sarcasm to a minimum. Sarcasm is the last refuge of the helpless and powerless, or whatever they say. And you, dear MP Forum comrade-in-arms, are neither helpless nor powerless. You're better than that!

Edit to add:

Open invite to any one who wants to meet up to do bits like this in the Chatauqua parking lot. 

Wearing a harness on top of a fighter pilot jump suit would be pretty extra funny.

.

Soloing is stupidly selfish.  Nobody wants to clean up that mess, but they will, cause good people clean up after the idiots all the time.  

The answer of course is onsight soloing.

First of all, don’t tell me what to do.  Second of all, among the many implied value judgements in your argument is that being a 5.13 or 5.14 climber is not impressive, and that the one doing the act is an intrinsic factor in the value of the feat itself, such that watching a 5.4 climber onsight 5.4 is more impressive to you than watching a 5.13 climber solo 5.10.   I disagree, and soloing 5.10, if it is impressive at all, is just as impressive, if not more so, if it is a walk in the park for the climber. the climbers max grade does not come into the calculation.  It is what it is.  Watching people solo routes who do not have it under control is the absolute worst and is not impressive in the slightest, for the reasons Carolina states.

Both get more difficult the closer they are to your limit.  The thing that is impressive is pushing the edge of what is possible.  

There is something about people who can stay calm when very close to mortal peril. Onsighting doesn’t have that.   But it does have an element of will to adhere to a rule set.  If you fear for your life, you may try very hard.  Can that same level of try hard be achieved without fear or prior knowledge?

But most importantly, being impressive is not the defining motivation of soloing or onsighting.  They are both bigger experiences than a grade, a risk, or a tick on a list.

Kevin Strickerwrote:

The answer of course is onsight soloing.

I see you, and I raise you onsight solo downclimbing.

'Impressive' is such a subjective word you can't really rank the two (onsighting and soloing) without contrivance. Onsighting a 5.13 R rated trad line is certainly more impressive than soloing a 5.10 handcrack, just as soloing a 5.13 is more impressive than a 5.10 onsight, even if it's someone's max grade. Then you get into onsight soloing, or onsights of X rated lines, or multipitch soloing, and it becomes even more contrived. This is one of those cases where there is so much subjectivity and grey area that blanket statements are worthless. 

"All else being relatively equal": All else being relatively equal, meth is better for you than soda. Kinda silly no?

M1 H1wrote:

First of all, don’t tell me what to do.  Second of all, among the many implied value judgements in your argument is that being a 5.13 or 5.14 climber is not impressive, and that the one doing the act is an intrinsic factor in the value of the feat itself, such that watching a 5.4 climber onsight 5.4 is more impressive to you than watching a 5.13 climber solo 5.10.   I disagree, and soloing 5.10, if it is impressive at all, is just as impressive, if not more so, if it is a walk in the park for the climber. the climbers max grade does not come into the calculation.  It is what it is.  Watching people solo routes who do not have it under control is the absolute worst and is not impressive in the slightest, for the reasons Carolina states.

First of all, don't tell ME what to do, bucko!
(presuming you use that line jokingly the same way as I do. e.g. when someone says "Have a good day." I sometimes playfully respond "Don't tell me how to live my life!" 

To be honest, I've started compulsively quiet-screaming it at the self-checkout machines in the grocery store.
"If you have a preferred shoppers card, scan it now."
"FUCK YOU, DISEMBODIED ROBOT LADY VOICE! I'm buying a gallon of milk at full price. I don't need your social engineering bullshit right now!" )

Second of all, no value judgments beyond what I stated ver batim should be assumed. I think climbing 5.14 is inherently admirable, as no one gets there by accident. It takes work and dedication, even for the most talented of climbers.

The thought of watching a 5.4 climber on-sight 5.4 is horrifying to me. I would discourage it, if the 5.4 climber asked for my opinion/guidance. A 5.4 climber onsighting 5.4 would not be more impressive to me than a 5.13 climber soloing 5.10 -- it would certainly be more disturbing, though.

Masterfully climbing a 5.10 is impressive, regardless of whether or not it's solo or protected. Soloing 5.10 under any circumstances is less impressive than fighting like hell on a rope to redpoint that same 5.10 climb.

The climber's max grade absolutely factors in to the significance of the grade they are soloing, as it modulates the inherent risk. It's much easier to feel in control when the physical effort is relatively minimal.

But yeah, watching sketchy solos is unpleasant and more depressing than impressive. 

Carolinawrote:

Soloing is stupidly selfish.  Nobody wants to clean up that mess, but they will, cause good people clean up after the idiots all the time.  

I empathize with these sentiments, but I don't fully agree with them.

There are valid reasons to solo, and many of them are not inherently selfish, at the core.

We're all gonna die.

Rarely is it a clean process.

Calebwrote:

Both get more difficult the closer they are to your limit.  The thing that is impressive is pushing the edge of what is possible.  

There is something about people who can stay calm when very close to mortal peril. Onsighting doesn’t have that.   But it does have an element of will to adhere to a rule set.  If you fear for your life, you may try very hard.  Can that same level of try hard be achieved without fear or prior knowledge?

But most importantly, being impressive is not the defining motivation of soloing or onsighting.  They are both bigger experiences than a grade, a risk, or a tick on a list.

"Impressive" and "Admirable" are inherently subjective value judgments. That's kind of the point of the forum here: state your opinion, add it to the pile, see what it looks like when the collective opinion pile takes shape.

Staying calm when close to mortal peril is admirable.

Seeking or inviting mortal peril is... something else.

If you fear for your life, you will try hard, but will be hindered by fear. A mom might be able to lift a car off her baby amidst an adrenaline rush, but no one is going to free solo Freerider successfully if it's the functional equivalent of a 4 hour panic attack.

That's part of why I contend that hard on-sights are more impressive/admirable than casual solos. A hard on-sight demands more try-hard and determination than a casual solo. And if a solo isn't casual, it's sketch. And sketchy solos are bad.

Being impressive is not and should not be the motivation for soloing or on-sighting. But it is a big motivator for many/most practitioners. Especially for soloists. They look so cool in their instagram posts! #solo #freesolo #influencer #sponsors #riskingMyLifeForFreeShoes

Louka Hendrickswrote:

'Impressive' is such a subjective word you can't really rank the two (onsighting and soloing) without contrivance. Onsighting a 5.13 R rated trad line is certainly more impressive than soloing a 5.10 handcrack, just as soloing a 5.13 is more impressive than a 5.10 onsight, even if it's someone's max grade. Then you get into onsight soloing, or onsights of X rated lines, or multipitch soloing, and it becomes even more contrived. This is one of those cases where there is so much subjectivity and grey area that blanket statements are worthless. 

"All else being relatively equal": All else being relatively equal, meth is better for you than soda. Kinda silly no?

I like silly. Let's play.

"Meth" generally refers to recreational use of methamphetamines, and whereas Ritalin and certain amphetamine substances can have medical value, "meth" as a term is loaded with a negative connotation. "Soda" is certainly vague. I drink a bunch of soda water. I infrequently drink sugary soda. I sometimes drink diet and/or caffeinated soda. I often worry that I should drink less soda water - maybe it's making me feel bloated... maybe I consume too much caffeine and need to cut back.... Maybe these diet flavored soda waters I buy from Dollar Tree are full of poisonous sweeteners that are slowly but surely rotting my brain and I won't know until it's too late. But mostly I see it as a fun and tasty way to hydrate. I usually feel better after drinking some. I can't say the same for "doing meth", as I've never dabbled... but the exploratory data doesn't looking promising or encouraging.

I would say that, all else being relatively equal, soda is a much, much healthier substance to have in your life than meth.

Now if we are talking about a small mini-dose of methamphetamine in a medical application, versus shotgunning a gallon of mountain dew before going base jumping.... the soda is worse for you, in that relatively unequal scenario of consideration.

--

I am specifically disagreeing with the statement you made that I have quoted in bold and requote here with strikeout, just to be stylish: "soloing a 5.13 is more impressive than a 5.10 onsight, even if it's someone's max grade."

I find the 5.9 climber breaking through to 5.10a with a full-rage effort onsight to be more impressive and inspiring than ANYONE soloing a 5.13 route.

Onsight soloing or XRated onsights are feats I would aggressively dissuade people I care about from attempting. 

(Which includes you, dear reader! 

But, you do you. I'm not your god. 

God is whoever you're performing for. )

Soloing is definitely a lot cooler.

Sierra Hillwrote:

I see you, and I raise you onsight solo downclimbing.

I think onsight solo downclimbing is actually safer than normal onsight soloing! If you're going down and bail then you know you can do every move on the way back up (and I find climbing up way easier than downclimbing).

I've definitely been in predicaments where I could do the move in the way up, but not reverse it on the way back down   When I'm soloing, I'm evaluating every move for "can I reverse this move while tired and gripped"

Sierra Hillwrote:

I see you, and I raise you onsight solo downclimbing.

Pipeline in Squamish (not my pic). Onsight freesolo FFA by Greg Cameron.

And to answer the OP, soloing is obviously way more impressive than onsighting. Consequences, purity, no second chances...impressive.

Onsighting is more impressive and should be celebrated.

Solo-ing shouldn't be admired. Solo-ing is something that should be a personal journey and undertaken for personal/spiritual reasons: NOT to impress people. 

grug gwrote:

Solo-ing is something that should be a personal journey and undertaken for personal/spiritual reasons: NOT to impress people. 

I would say the same thing about onsighting.

This is a silly thread to begin with, but I don’t think there was any inference by Brent that the degree of impressiveness was the motivation for engaging in either activity, but whether which activity is more impressive…doing something that ends up being impressive to someone else doesn’t mean that was the doers motivation for doing the thing.  

Silly is a fair assessment.

Seriously, though.

Which is harder? More impressive? Which would you rather say you accomplished?

Soloing Freerider?

Or 

Onsighting Freerider?

A successful on sight lead is just the best feeling ever. There is enough managing of fear without taking away the rope.  Besides, I would always dislike it on the odd occasion that someone followed by me. Now they’ve just added risk to my climb. Tie-in, rack up with only as much as you need and enjoy the challenge of gear placement and learning how to protect tricky trad routes.  

Having a stripped down rack and understanding how to use it adds a degree of challenge that soloing misses.  

Calebwrote:

I would say the same thing about onsighting.

I would say the same about all trad climbing. 

Brent Kellywrote:

Silly is a fair assessment.

Seriously, though.

Which is harder? More impressive? Which would you rather say you accomplished?

Soloing Freerider?

Or 

Onsighting Freerider?

Quoting to respect your acknowledgement of the silliness. Also to flag that this follow up question that's specific to Freerider is substantially different than the original prompt, but doesn't necessarily change my response.

The original question (without reference to any specific route or occasion) is no more rational than asking "What's more impressive: onsighting or writing a novel?". But the logical flaws I see in the two questions are similar:

1. The reasons that I, and I think most people, would find either of these categories "impressive" are so fundamentally different, and appeal to such different parts of me, that I can't think of any remotely fair way I'd compare them. It would have to be a fully arbitrary and subjective reaction. Which is fine, I suppose, but I don't think we should pretend that it's a debate with more substance than "what's the best color?"
2. The context, details, and background of specific events and accomplishments could help inform a more thoughtful comparison of the impressiveness of one onsight and one solo. My feeling about which is more impressive will change based on dozens of factors, including things like my mood and what types of things I'm drawn to at the moment. The conclusion that every onsight will impress you more than every solo, or any similar stance, feels like it could only be reached if you've completely written off one of the categories. 

Brent - no judgement for the post, it was enough to get me writing. But based on your examples and supporting arguments, my takeaway is that you find onsighting more impressive because you're impressed by people who are trying something at their limit, look close to falling, barely scrape by, and succeed. 

If that's your bar, then yeah - soloing sucks. But in an instance where I find a solo impressive, none of those things are part of my criteria. It often reflects me being impressed with someone's mastery, their mental skills like focus and emotion management, the quality or pace of their movement, and other things like that. 

To use another semi-exaggerated analogy, would you find a world-class concert pianist's performance to be "less impressive" than your friend's onsight at Wall of the 90s? You're entitled to that opinion, but I'd also argue that it's not something that can be justified with any objective logic.

I also find it necessary to mention that there are far more instances of someone onsighting something at their limit, or people who can do so, than people who solo at high levels (or write good novels, or play mandolin like Chris Thile, etc, etc). You can see someone desperately onsight their first 5.10 at dozens of crags on any given weekend. Hard solos are far more rare, both in overall frequency and the number of people who have ever done one. I don't think that statistical frequency is the only criteria for something being impressive, but I would argue that something being rare and incredibly hard to achieve is a common element of what people find "impressive."

Purple is the best color, by the way.

The only impressive person in climbing anymore is Steve Hoffman. 

Sky Blue. - It's soothing. Natural and abundant. The Sky is blue. The ocean is blue. Blue things are usually comfortable and cool. It's a color associated with loyalty and reliability.

Purple is rad too. Royalty and whatnot. Red just makes me feel... uneasy? So I prefer cool blue to passionate purple.

--

To your point #2, that's kind of what I was trying to address with "all else being relatively equal". It's an inherently vague and fuzzy comparison space because they are difficult to equate.

Hence, what's more impressive? 

Onsighting 5.13? or Soloing 5.13? 

Onsighting 5.9? or Soloing 5.9? 

Onsighting Moonlight Buttress? Or soloing it?

It's not "barely scaping by" I find inspiring and impressive. I still think a 5.13 climber onsighting 5.10 is impressive. It's grit, discipline, strength, skill, and wisdom.

An onsight is proof that the climber *could* have solo'ed the route, and *on the very first go*.

A solo is proof only that a climber expected to succeed in not falling (or at least was willing to die if they were wrong).

Hard on-sighting is rad. Hard soloing is kinda dumb.

Rarity doesn't make something inherently impressive (at least not in the way I mean "impressive", which is more specifically "laudable", "commendable","desirable","admirable", and not just "noteworthy" or "remarkable".)

You can see a 787 take off every 30 minutes at the nearest international airport.

Meanwhile, I rarely stand on one leg, jump in a circle, and do a cover to cover shout-read of "Precious", based on the novel Push, by Sapphire, while wearing a full suit of chain-mail.

The 787 is still more impressive.

---

Lets say it's a given that soloing 4 number grades below your limit is so physically undemanding that it's basically a given that success is inevitable.

i.e. the 5.14 climber solos 5.10 with zero stress or insecurity, provided they don't have an irrational fear response. The 5.10 climber solos 5.6 comfortably.

Onsighting harder and harder means you can solo harder and harder.

Soloing harder and harder means that either (a) your onsighting limit has improved OR (b) you've grown more comfortable with inviting/accepting fatal risk OR (c) you've climbed the route so many times, it's become as routine as performing a musical composition.

What's more impressive? Sight-reading The Rite of Spring? Or performing The Rite of Spring for the 10,000th time, yet with a gun to your head that goes off if you play one wrong note?

Onsight soloing IS impressive, but far less admirable than onsighting with a rope failsafe. 

--

I know how fuzzy this comparison is and how squinty the logic has to be, but it's not an absurd debate or consideration.

It's fucking rad that you can see someone desperately onsight their first 5.10 at dozens of crags on any given weekend. Our great grandparents used to say 5.10 was as hard as it would ever get. 

I still remember my first 5.10 sends. Gym Toprope: West slab wall right of the chimney at the old Summit Grapevine behind the Cinemark Tinseltown. Outside Lead: Rat Stew at Bruise Brothers in the Red with the Notre Dame Climbing Club, Jonathan on the belay.