What is a First ascent?

mschlocker wrote:Definitely aid routes count. I'm not sure what onsight means though in terms of an aid route. Nobody seems to care if you blow a few pieces on the way, in fact it tends to garner respect. The cool thing about aid is you can do nearly whatever the f you want and it's all good. Aid FAs seem to be off the radar these days so the original comments, at least mine, weren't aimed in that direction.

As an example there are lots of new and old sandstone multi pitch spires and wall aid routes that are awaiting total free ascent attemps.However as the majority of climbers these days rarely leave the safety of bolted or single pitch crack climbs... as you say such adventure is currently off the radar.

Will Butler wrote:John Gill and Bob Murray were from a different era and their style should be respected as such. When you introduce historical ethics to a modern conversation it starts to get tricky. Case in point would be how Pat Ament gets credit for the FFA of Supremacy Crack, possibly the first 5.11 in Colorado, even though he hung on it. Maybe ground-up without falling wasn't what constituted "freeing" a route in 1965 but it sure does now. We have to make sure to respect the accomplishments of those who paved the way but I'm sure even they like seeing people improve upon their style. That if you claim a first toprope ascent you are freaking lame and people should make fun of you (in a modern context of course).

Historically, "freeing" a route still meant doing the entire pitch without falling or weighting the rope. However, "yo yo" ascents were much more accepted, which of course often meant that cruxes were toproped.

I just think that our present toprope phobia is kind of ironic in this day when people complain about bad bolt placements on sport routes, stick clip up to four bolts, and assume that sport needs to be inherently "safe." If we are minimizing risk and boldness in favor of just movement, then TR's should be valid as well. Once you get past the irrational fear of clean sport whippers, there is nothing inherently "bold" or glorious about a sport fall; you know it is going to be safe– so why do we continue to laud this contrived "lead" ethic, then?

camhead wrote: ... "yo yo" ascents were much more accepted, which of course often meant that cruxes were toproped...

The cruxes were toproped, AFTER they had been lead. Every inch of the climb was lead at some point during the campaingn.

camhead wrote: If we are minimizing risk and boldness in favor of just movement, then TR's should be valid as well. Once you get past the irrational fear of clean sport whippers, there is nothing inherently "bold" or glorious about a sport fall; you know it is going to be safe– so why do we continue to laud this contrived "lead" ethic, then?

Good question. I can recommend a good course for earning your toprope instrcutor certification.

The requirement to lead comes from mountaineering, but in terms of modern-day single-pitch cragging, it is entirely contrived. We could solve a lot of problems if people respected the TR.

From what I've read here, I think the OP really should have asked: What constitutes a new route?

I think these issues are best resolved by dutifully recording FA info. If this is done, then in time, the climbers who explored relentlessy, with vision and were skilled climbers will be recognized for the quintessential routes they pioneered.

Mike Anderson wrote:The requirement to lead comes from mountaineering, but in terms of modern-day single-pitch cragging, it is entirely contrived. We could solve a lot of problems if people respected the TR. From what I've read here, I think the OP really should have asked: What constitutes a new route? I think these issues are best resolved by dutifully recording FA info. If this is done, then in time, the climbers who explored relentlessy, with vision and were skilled climbers will be recognized for the quintessential routes they pioneered.

Do you report FAs once you've toprope sent them?

FA = First Ascent PERIOD

It says that I am the first one to go from point A to point B and document it. It doesn't matter how I got there.

If you need to start adding Free Solo or TR or Hang dog or with my shlong hanging out be my guest... whatever makes you feel good for the day.

The point is that we can either thank or curse the individual who paved the way for the rest of us...

Will Butler wrote: Do you report FAs once you've toprope sent them?

No, but if I climb a multi-pitch route with a partner, I might follow half the pitches but I consider it an ascent.

Mike Anderson wrote: No, but if I climb a multi-pitch route with a partner, I might follow half the pitches but I consider it an ascent.

Touché. I do the same. Though it still nags at me if I wasn't on the sharp end for the route's crux.

I think the two abbreviations FFA and FA distinguish well between ground up ascents where no gear was weighted (FFA), and otherwise (FA), which could include TR, aid, hang-dog lead etc. As far as variations counting as a new first ascent, I think there are good historical precedent for counting variations as separate routes/FA's, so long as it's clear that the FA for the variation was only for the variation - that's a guidebook issue.

Red wrote:I'd throw in: ground up on lead without weighting the rope. Unless it's bouldering, still ground up without falling off the rock.

That would be an FFA (first free ascent).

lance bateman wrote: What about FRA's? Winged Warrior

Les Ellison and I did a guide to the Wasatch a long time ago. We both agreed simply that if you don't know who did the climb first, you left it as "unknown".

If you have an unknown classic done many years ago, you may have someone 20 years later reporting them as the first recorded ascent...seems unnecessary.