What defines a first ascent?

I never have and never will recognize a top rope as a first ascent. never reported one of mine and never respectad anyone else for reporting one.  If someone has anchors in and is working a line for an FA I respect that but if they walk away from the project without leading it from the bottom to the top  I have zero respect for that regardless of how hard or dangerous it may have seemed to them.  Start at the bottom and climb to the top.  If you have to hike around to the top and  set a top rope you have by definition cheated and it does not count twords the FA any more that a one hang counts as an FFA. they may seem like silly rules but they are our rules :)

A first ascent is when you send that sick pink one in the corner before your bros do.

Nick Goldsmith wrote: I never have and never will recognize a top rope as a first ascent. never reported one of mine and never respectad anyone else for reporting one.  If someone has anchors in and is working a line for an FA I respect that but if they walk away from the project without leading it from the bottom to the top  I have zero respect for that regardless of how hard or dangerous it may have seemed to them.  Start at the bottom and climb to the top.  If you have to hike around to the top and  set a top rope you have by definition cheated and it does not count twords the FA any more that a one hang counts as an FFA. they may seem like silly rules but they are our rules :)

Nonsense, there are again places where there isn't pro and bolting is not or was not allowed.

I can assure you these were both FAs by any criteria and both posed way more risks than if they'd been bolted.

The first ascent is the first documented ascent of the route.

Nick Goldsmith wrote: I never have and never will recognize a top rope as a first ascent. never reported one of mine and never respectad anyone else for reporting one.  If someone has anchors in and is working a line for an FA I respect that but if they walk away from the project without leading it from the bottom to the top  I have zero respect for that regardless of how hard or dangerous it may have seemed to them.  Start at the bottom and climb to the top.  If you have to hike around to the top and  set a top rope you have by definition cheated and it does not count twords the FA any more that a one hang counts as an FFA. they may seem like silly rules but they are our rules :)

Obviously you have never heard of Pete Cleveland. 

Robert Hall wrote:
If a person TR'd a route first, they can report it as a Top Roped route;  someone subsequently leading it has the right to re-name the route and place fixed protection and claim the FA.

There are many routes that were first done on TR. They may have later been done lead with gear or or lacking gear bolted. And in some cases climbed solo. They do NOT get renamed. Routes that get renamed are typically aid routes that subsequently go free.

Top-roping is the same as following (rope from above) and doesn't qualify as a FA.  Nobody ever used to claim a FA on a TR route.  It's something new.
A free solo FA (e.g. Krystal Klyr in Eldo) is in fact a FA and should never be retro-bolted but left to others to repeat in the same style-with or without anchors at the top.

David Baltz wrote: Top-roping is the same as following (rope from above) and doesn't qualify as a FA.  Nobody ever used to claim a FA on a TR route.  It's something new.

Something new ... HAHAHAHA. TR FA have been around for decades, many decades. I know of recorded TR going back into the 60s. It might be area dependent but it has certainly not something new. Even the FA of the Lost Arrow Tip which was prusiked in 47 is recorded as such. 

Obviously if Pete Cleavland  free soloed his routes instead of top ropeing them I would have heard of him.  Do you think anyone would know who Honlove is if he was a top rope specialist?   Seriously I do not and will not recognize any top rope ascent as an FA and I have done plenty of them. The TR ascent is simply practice for the FA.  If that is how it was done  back in HJ's day fine but standards improve/ change.  It used to be acceptable  and common practice to not pull the rope between falls. You could reach a high point, get gear in, fall off, lower down and leave the rope running through the last piece of protection at the high point. Everyone took a nice long rest and then someone tied into the rope and went back up and fired the FFA and it counted.  That method no longer flies and top roping is simply practice for the actual send. You don't have to like it but times change.

Joe. sorry to let your guy down but it's still waiting for Honlove to get the FA.

David Baltz wrote: Top-roping is the same as following (rope from above) and doesn't qualify as a FA.  Nobody ever used to claim a FA on a TR route.  It's something new.

Yeah, like 1974 new...

Nick Goldsmith wrote: Seriously I do not and will not recognize any top rope ascent as an FA and I have done plenty of them. 

Thank goodness I could give a fuck if you recognize them. I'd might more impressed if I thought you could actually get up either of them and then not recognize them.

If that is how it was done  back in HJ's day fine but standards improve/ change.

No, that's how it was back in one particular crag where there wasn't pro and you couldn't bolt. But again, both those TR's were way more dangerous than if they'd been bolted.

It used to be acceptable  and common practice to not pull the rope between falls. You could reach a high point, get gear in, fall off, lower down and leave the rope running through the last piece of protection at the high point. Everyone took a nice long rest and then someone tied into the rope and went back up and fired the FFA and it counted.

Well, that's a complete crock of shit. The standard in the 70's was you fall, you come down and pull the rope and re-lead. It, along with no dogging, were two of a number of things that got lost in 'modern' climbing.

Thing thread is evidence that literally everything is open for debate on Mountain Project. Future discussion topics:

What defines a:
-climbing shoe
-night climb
-belay device
-ground fall

well somewere along the line by the time the eighties rolled around  that was how they were freeing the aid lines at the gunks. Rope stayed through the high point.  It's pretty well documented in Lynn Hills biography. I also participated in an attempt to free a line in Independence pass about 1986 and they were using the same method out there. Sport climbers came along a few years later and pushed it back to you have to pull the rope once it has been weighted.  

And no you don't get extra points for doing stupid dangerous rope tricks.

Nick Goldsmith doesn't believe in FAs unless they are his.

Oh bullshit tardfool.  I do not even count my own top rope FA's I consider them practice for the FA attempt. 

Nick Goldsmith wrote:Seriously I do not and will not recognize any top rope ascent as an FA and I have done plenty of them. The TR ascent is simply practice for the FA. 

Agreed Nick. A climb done on a top-rope and claiming "first ascent" is like taking a helicopter to the top of Everest and claiming a route. Ridiculous. You're on a leash from the top guiding you and keeping you 100% safe the entire time. The history of climbing first ascents is always ground up, no questions or concerns. Nobody scrambles to the top and sets up a rope and then climbs the route. You find the route, scope the line/route, figure out how to get up it from the ground using whichever climbing style (aid, free, solo) and attempt to reach the top. If you reach the top then you can claim the first ascent.

Northeast Mountain Guiding wrote:

Agreed Nick. A climb done on a top-rope and claiming "first ascent" is like taking a helicopter to the top of Everest and claiming a route. Ridiculous. You're on a leash from the top guiding you and keeping you 100% safe the entire time. The history of climbing first ascents is always ground up, no questions or concerns. Nobody scrambles to the top and sets up a rope and then climbs the route. You find the route, scope the line/route, figure out how to get up it from the ground using whichever climbing style (aid, free, solo) and attempt to reach the top. If you reach the top then you can claim the first ascent.

Why the macho need to drill holes in everything and lead it? 

If you are sport climbing then it's all about the physical difficulty of the route, right? 

Tradiban wrote:

Why the macho need to drill holes in everything and lead it? 

If you are sport climbing then it's all about the physical difficulty of the route, right? 

Not exactly sure what you mean but I'll do my best to respond. Respectful climbers don't "drill holes in everything". Respectful climbers place bolts on rock where there are no features to climb free or aid...usually. But sport climbing, after you install said bolts, is still lead climbed from the ground up and not hanging on a rope. Clifftop bolts are usually placed to avoid environmental damage there or for rescue purposes by local or regional teams.

Northeast Mountain Guiding wrote:

Respectful climbers place bolts on rock where there are no features to climb free or aid...usually.

What about all those thousands of protection bolts placed on non-sport climbs?