*Hot take* Ticking lead/fell/hung is like spam. Mtn project should get rid of it

I think tracking your attempts is good, but having it publicly displayed ends up with 90% of a routes tick list being LFH. If your attempts were just documented on your profile, and the publicly displayed tick list only had sends, it would be less cluttered 

It would be cool if the graph visually differentiated between sends and attempts or there was an option to just show sends. It might end up cluttered if both are being shown independently. 

I personally like seeing the fell/hung ticks for beta and for telling whether or not a climb is sandbagged

Jeff Pinley wrote:

I think people over do ticking lead/fell/hung. I hate when looking at ticks and 90% of them are nonsense lead/fell/hung. I think mtn project should make lead/fell/hung only show on that persons account. Leave the publicly displayed information to only be redpoints, onsights, and pinkpoints

I think you have too much time on your hands and need to get out more.  

Interesting arguments all around, I can understand the perspectives on both sides of this.

Personally, I tick everything I do unless I didn't finish the route which is <1% of the time. I'm at the point where I'm projecting routes more and more often and I like to have a record of how many tries it took me to redpoint a route. I also like to see the all time pitches climbed in my profile.

If I saw somebody lead/fell/hung a bunch on (to me) easy routes, then yeah I probably would pass on a day with them. But if I saw the same on grades that are (to me) hard, I'd just take it as they were projecting and I'd have a sense of what grade below that to suggest for a day where it wouldn't be a hang fest.

Lead/fell/hung should be its own column on the opinions/ticks section. 

Also, if you haven't sent and you tick lead/fell/hung how seriously should we take your grade suggestion? 

I honestly have the opposite opinion; I want more people ticking lead fell/hung. None of that manicured MP profile of only their sends. I wanna see the bad and the good. An expert has failed more times than a beginner has even tried. 

I still haven't heard why people want to only see redpoints/sends... Are you trying to find who has sent a route for a particular reason? Isn't seeing everyone's ticks more relevant if you want to know how popular or sandbagged a route is?

Only “onsight, soft” should be permitted. All else is irrelevant. 

Just wondering... should a Lead/fell/bailed choice be offered? 

Iz K wrote:

Well done!

I believe the OP got, as the kids say, ratioed.

Lead/fell/hung tells me a lot in the context of who it is and therefore what I might expect.

Wesley K wrote:

Lead/fell/hung should be its own column on the opinions/ticks section. 

Also, if you haven't sent and you tick lead/fell/hung how seriously should we take your grade suggestion? 

If you haven't sent, then downgrading a route is more than silly.  On the other hand, if you have sent many routes of a similar grade, but had a hard time on this one, then that may be relevant. 

I’m with the OP.

If you want to record every attempt you make on a route - how many burns, who you climbed with, beta, whether you fell at the crux, whatever - I totally get that. But that’s a climbing journal, not a tick list. Make those entries private, or give people a separate project/session log.

To me, a public tick should mean you actually sent the route: onsight, flash, redpoint, pinkpoint, whatever applies. 

I’d go one step further and only allow grade votes from people who have actually sent the route. You can absolutely learn a lot from hanging on a route, but doing every move with rests is not the same experience as linking those moves from the ground. On a route near your limit, the difference between “I can do all the moves” and “I can send this” can literally be months or seasons. Sending is what makes the grade what it is.

And maybe I’m becoming the old guy yelling at clouds here, but I also think constantly logging every single burn chips away a little at the sanctity of a send. Not everything needs to produce a little digital achievement. Sometimes you tried the route, fell off, lowered, and went home. Earn the tick.

Would you feel better if it just said “climbing journal” at the top instead of “ticks”?

Big Red wrote:

I still haven't heard why people want to only see redpoints/sends... Are you trying to find who has sent a route for a particular reason? Isn't seeing everyone's ticks more relevant if you want to know how popular or sandbagged a route is?

This

It's still somewhat entertaining to read comments that are peripheral to policing somebody else's profile by dictating whether they do or do not record their own attempts. As though recording attempts but not sends actually affects anybody in any meaningful way.

If the lead/fell/hung option was taken away, what would stop people from ticking the ambiguous "Lead" option and then just putting in the comment "Fell" "Hung" etc.? I'm all for discussion but this seems like making a mountain out of a molehill. 

Rachael v2 wrote:

Would you feel better if it just said “climbing journal” at the top instead of “ticks”?

Honestly, yes. This is obviously an incredibly low-stakes distinction - sending a rock climb doesn’t make anyone a better or more worthy person. I just think words should mean things. A tick list is a list of routes you’ve sent; a climbing journal can include every burn, fall, beta note, session, whatever. Calling all of those “ticks” just makes “tick” a meaningless category - there's value in having a distinct word for “I completed this route.”

And maybe this is just where my own relationship with climbing comes into it, but I think there’s something lost when every attempt gets put into the same list. You can look back and see this huge forest of routes you’ve “climbed,” but the individual trees start to mean less. For me, a huge part of climbing is the completion aspect - not the grade or the little digital checkmark, but choosing something that challenges me, sticking with it, and eventually seeing it through. I like having a tick mean that.

If that’s not what someone else wants out of climbing, totally fair. But then yeah - call it a climbing journal and my entire objection disappears.

Big Red wrote:

I still haven't heard why people want to only see redpoints/sends... Are you trying to find who has sent a route for a particular reason? Isn't seeing everyone's ticks more relevant if you want to know how popular or sandbagged a route is?

I'm for it because I like looking at the stats of a route and seeing how various people I know have performed on it, but feel like the lead/fell/hung ticks dilute and clutter that information pretty badly.  I'm not necessarily 100% for fully removing them, but somehow consolidating them to 1 line per person with maybe a drop down or link to that person's history with the route would be an improvement IMO.

Not to stir the pot, but sends indicate a certain personality, as do lead/fell/hung or TR or Solo.  I tend to enjoy climbing with people that send somewhat frequently and prioritize that.  A lot of climbers don’t care about sending, so I look at their ticks to see what they tick.  If it’s consistent recent sends, we might mesh.  There’s grades and styles and locations as well that are all useful info.  I agree that a nice, well organized climbing journal would be even more helpful, but people will still just do whatever they want anyway.

It’s like they used to say, the poster must not fall. 

Strava for rock climbing!