How many years does it really take to climb an 8a?

saign charlesteinwrote:

I think their point was: That anyone regardless of genetics, who is dedicated, and works hard enough can get there.

I agree that a lot of the super gifted are out of touch, but they’ve also been around a lot of climbers, and in this case, l think they’re right. 

You meant they’ve also been around a lot of elite climbers right? The population of climbers hanging out with Macleod/Ondra/Magnus are very different from your average climber population. Any attempt to draw inference on the general climber population from such biased population is fundamentally wrong. 

Yurywrote:

It's typical for people with good inheritance to ascribe their success to motivation and hard work.

It looks like Adam Ondra, Magnus and "saign charlestein" make the same attribution mistake.

Are you really going to say that Ondra and Magnus shouldn't ascribe their success to motivation and hard work?  

You don't get to choose your genetics but, you do get to choose how hard you work and how motivated you are.  As such, it makes sense to ascribe your success to the things which you do that you actually have control over or things which you actually "do".

Having favorable genetics is more or less a baseline requirement to be at the top of literally any sport but, they're also competing with only those who have favorable genetics.  Yeah, they might be playing on a different field than the majority of us but, they're all playing on the same field at the top.  What separates phenomenal climbers with good genetics and the best climbers in the world most certainly comes down to motivation, hard work and consistent effort.  The same holds true for any sport really.

Reese Stanleywrote:

Are you really going to say that Ondra and Magnus shouldn't ascribe their success to motivation and hard work?  

You don't get to choose your genetics but, you do get to choose how hard you work and how motivated you are.  As such, it makes sense to ascribe your success to the things which you do that you actually have control over or things which you actually "do".

Having favorable genetics is more or less a baseline requirement to be at the top of literally any sport but, they're also competing with only those who have favorable genetics.  Yeah, they might be playing on a different field than the majority of us but, they're all playing on the same field at the top.  What separates phenomenal climbers with good genetics and the best climbers in the world most certainly comes down to motivation, hard work and consistent effort.  The same holds true for any sport really.

Interesting perspective, I generally think of it in the opposite way. Take women's world cup climbing for example: it seems to border on insulting to say Janja is in a different league from the other top women simply because she wants it more or works that much harder. Perhaps she does - I don't know what her training is like relative to her teammates, however I do know that everyone competing in world cups devotes their entire lives to climbing and training. Even those on the same Slovenian team, with the same coaches and very similar backgrounds have not nearly found the same level of success she has.

So I see motivation, hard work and consistent effort from a very young age as being a requirement to be on that playing field, but those at the very top just seem to have something else, whatever that is.

Chuck Beckerwrote:

Interesting perspective, I generally think of it in the opposite way. Take women's world cup climbing for example: it seems to border on insulting to say Janja is in a different league from the other top women simply because she wants it more or works that much harder. Perhaps she does - I don't know what her training is like relative to her teammates, however I do know that everyone competing in world cups devotes their entire lives to climbing and training. Even those on the same Slovenian team, with the same coaches and very similar backgrounds have not nearly found the same level of success she has.

So I see motivation, hard work and consistent effort from a very young age as being a requirement to be on that playing field, but those at the very top just seem to have something else, whatever that is.

Right, but we’re talking about the best of the best. 8a is a warm up for these people and they would probably be extremely upset if they didn’t flash or onsight every one they tried.

I believe it’s a very achievable goal for the average climber given the right amount of hard work and dedication. It might be at the very top end of what they can physically do and a lifetime achievement. But doable.

To the argument that those guys only hang out with high end athletes: They both own climbing gyms and have climbed since they were kids. You know how many thousands of climbers they’ve been around in their lives? I think they’ve got a large sample size to draw an opinion from.

saign charlesteinwrote:

Right, but we’re talking about the best of the best. 8a is a warm up for these people and they would probably be extremely upset if they didn’t flash or onsight every one they tried.

Yes I wasn't really addressing the original question of climbing 8a, but the comments specifically discussing the role genetics plays at the very top of the sport.

If you're of average weight, height, fairly healthy and relatively young, you can likely climb "X level" in above average time with the proper dedication.  

(spray warning...) Using my own climbing as an example: I'm below average height (5'5"), weight (between 125 and 135) and relatively weak overall.  I started climbing seriously in about 2015.  I worked hard to improve technique, tactics and climbing specific physical strength since then.  In 2017 I climbed V7, in 2019 V10 and in 2021 V11.  I think my advancements are either below or about on par with the effort I have put in so far.

Asking how long it takes to climb a certain grade prompts even more questions, like "how hard are you willing to work?" and "will you quit before you get there?".  I think a lot of people may expect to climb a certain grade by a certain time but then don't put in the proper work and are disappointed by their lack of results.  It may sound cheesy, but I honesty believe that the only limiting factor to achieving your goals is yourself.  

Sam Dwrote:

If you're of average weight, height, fairly healthy and relatively young, you can likely climb "X level" in above average time with the proper dedication.  

(spray warning...) Using my own climbing as an example: I'm below average height (5'5"), weight (between 125 and 135) and relatively weak overall.  I started climbing seriously in about 2015.  I worked hard to improve technique, tactics and climbing specific physical strength since then.  In 2017 I climbed V7, in 2019 V10 and in 2021 V11.  I think my advancements are either below or about on par with the effort I have put in so far.

Asking how long it takes to climb a certain grade prompts even more questions, like "how hard are you willing to work?" and "will you quit before you get there?".  I think a lot of people may expect to climb a certain grade by a certain time but then don't put in the proper work and are disappointed by their lack of results.  It may sound cheesy, but I honesty believe that the only limiting factor to achieving your goals is yourself.  

Well, sort of. There are also physical limitations, but also the need for many to get and maintain a job, family and other obligations, life….. I think the concept of ‘privilege’ is way overused currently; but in this case it is appropriate to say that you have to either be privileged or be willing to sacrifice a great deal, to focus so hard on pushing your climbing grades—unless you have significant genetic ‘advantages’. Gyms and dedicated training devices make it easier, but still, for most, one has to be willing to set aside so much to achieve high levels of climbing accomplishment. I wonder how many, looking back, will feel that it was worth it.

Frank Steinwrote:

It is also a matter of perspective. At most American crags, 8a feels like an elite grade. But, then you go to someplace like Ceuse, and the MEDIAN grade being climbed there on any day between sectors Berlin and Demilune, which includes the Biographie sector and is the most popular stretch of rock, is about 8a+. One feels really small projecting the warmups. 

I was reading about this area of Spain where everyone climbs 8a. The easiest thing there is like 7a so when people take their kids to the crag to teach them to climb that's what they put them on. Lots quit but it fast tracks everyone else. 

Alan Rubinwrote:

Well, sort of. There are also physical limitations, but also the need for many to get and maintain a job, family and other obligations, life….. I think the concept of ‘privilege’ is way overused currently; but in this case it is appropriate to say that you have to either be privileged or be willing to sacrifice a great deal, to focus so hard on pushing your climbing grades—unless you have significant genetic ‘advantages’. Gyms and dedicated training devices make it easier, but still, for most, one has to be willing to set aside so much to achieve high levels of climbing accomplishment. I wonder how many, looking back, will feel that it was worth it.

Totally worth it. I gave up a life of mediocrity to pursue rock climbing and traveled the country many times and met plenty of amazing people along the way. I’m chasing my own goals and dreams, and many people are envious of the life I created for myself in pursuing climbing.

For myself, I spent my first two years climbing mostly trad climbing, and pushing myself that way. Then I went to the red and fell in love with sport climbing. In the five years since, I’ve climbed something like 20 8a’s, and a few harder. I centered my life around travel and climbing, and mostly just climb outside. Hard work and dedication is what gets you there. For what it’s worth I’m 34 and started climbing at 26. 

Wow the testosterone poisoning in this thread is something else

Doug Chismwrote:

I was reading about this area of Spain where everyone climbs 8a. The easiest thing there is like 7a so when people take their kids to the crag to teach them to climb that's what they put them on. Lots quit but it fast tracks everyone else. 

Another requirement to climb "X grade" that we haven't touched on much yet is community.

A circle of willing belayers climbing at the same crags, at the same level or higher is needed - and then there's the shared beta.

I think the shared beta is massive. To climb "X grade" is one thing, to work it out from scratch by yourself with e.g no chalked holds, no buddies who have climbed it, and no prehung draws seems to be almost unheard of these days. People film everything and there are videos at your fingertips for short/medium/tall beta of your choice.

Ricky Harlinewrote:

I can assure you I try much harder than most climbers

I have never heard someone who actually tries harder than most climbers say this.

To get back on topic, I'll echo a lot of the points I made on reddit in regards to this. Firstly, the second chart regarding progression is plotted as a standard line with error bounds surrounding it which both requires a lot of assumptions about the data set to be true to be an accurate display of the information (they aren't) as well as doesn't really provide your viewers with any useful or accurate information.

Secondly, the visualizations displayed don't actually answer the question. They answer the question "how long does it take an average person who climbs 8a to get there?" which isn't the question. The answer to the question in most folks case is "you'll never climb 8a". And that's fine. Visualizations/discussions around how many people ever attain specific maximum grades should be had. Otherwise it just continues the narrative that 8a should be considered an inevitability and if you're not reaching it, you're bad/something is wrong with you/etc. Side note here: These charts should be cumulative rather than distinct. You're looking at like 20 grades per chart - there's no reasonable way to be make good comparisons across the board there. I want to know what percentile I'm in, not that 5% of people share my same progression status, or whatever that looks like.

Lastly, there's really no discussion here on the actual data source, which is easily the most important part of any data project. The 8a data source is already a super self-selecting data source - folks who use it are innately more likely to be more passionate about climbing, training, logging, etc. than the average climber, even the average climber who may stumble into this youtube video. As a result, any conclusions and narratives being taken away from this data set have the responsibility to have a discussion around how this is highly likely to be a much more performant population than the true climbing population.

It's certainly an interesting collection of visualizations but as it relates to telling an accurate, comprehensive, responsible, and useful data story - I'd say this really falls short of the mark. It's not an issue specific to this video though - I don't think I've ever seen a climbing performance data project actually hit the mark there. The data is just too biased (self selecting population to even be a part of the study population), low-quality (too many non-regular users, folks who may be inaccurately logging, etc.), and non-standardized (how many people had similar goals the whole time they were logging? are people all logging the same? did everyone start logging as soon as they started climbing?) to be useful and nobody wants to read or listen to someone caveat all of these visualizations with all of those important notes.

Reese Stanleywrote:

Are you really going to say that Ondra and Magnus shouldn't ascribe their success to motivation and hard work?  

Reese Stanley, you completely missed the whole point of this discussion.
It's not about lucky outliers like Ondra and Magnus.
It's about climbers with average or below average genetics inheritance.

Sam Dwrote:

(spray warning...) Using my own climbing as an example: I'm below average height (5'5"), weight (between 125 and 135) and relatively weak overall. 

"I'm below average height (5'5"), weight (between 125 and 135)" - lean body type is good for a climber, but this is not the most important factor
"relatively weak overall." - I suspect that this statement without any supporting information is just a regular BS.

The reason there are so many 8a climbers in Europe and they progress so quickly is multifaceted:

1) They've got way more 8as close to major population centers

2) Their 8as are frankly softer

3) Their 8as are a more enjoyable style (steep limestone)

Even in the US there are pockets of 'under/over'-represented 5.13 climbers for the same reasons (density of hard sport, soft grades, and quality of hard sport)

Also, when you travel to Europe to sport climb, you're going to these '5.13 hotspots' so there's a huge sampling bias. Do a road trip to Rifle and you'd come to the same misguided conclusion about US climbers.

Yurywrote:

Reese Stanley, you completely missed the whole point of this discussion.
It's not about lucky outliers like Ondra and Magnus.
It's about climbers with average or below average genetics inheritance.

I wasn't trying to address the point of the discussion, which is why I responded directly to your comment.  If you want my opinion on the discussion as a whole: 

Quite frankly, most people I see don't reach their full potential.  I know I'm a couple of grades off my maximum potential.  I did my hardest boulder to-date in one session.

In my opinion if you are able to climb 5.12-/V5 within the first year or two of the sport, 5.13/V8 within 5 years is a very reasonable if not low expectation given your genetics and abilities.  If you're a couple years into the sport and you're climbing 5.10/5.11, it's likely that your top-end is going to be somewhere around 5.12/V5 after 5 years of climbing.

I see a lot of people get stuck in the V5/6 or 5.11+/5.12- range.  In my opinion, 60+% of those climbers are capable of climbing 5.13/V7-8 if push came to shove.  I think most climbers (not outside of their physical prime) could improve 2-3 grades within two years if they really wanted to.

The thing I see most is that people chronically underestimate themselves.  Dream big, most of the time you have way more in you than you think.

ryan climbs sometimes wrote:

What is 8a? 

Oh, I don’t know…Bastille Crack?  More like 7c, I suppose. 

All the folks here posting about their anecdotal experiences and preaching about how everyone can do the same clearly don't understand the concept of survivorship bias.

David Bwrote:

All the folks here posting about their anecdotal experiences and preaching about how everyone can do the same clearly don't understand the concept of survivorship bias.

With all due respect, it's not like there's a lot of objective data, studies or substantive material out there on this topic.  This isn't a peer-reviewed journal... it's Mountain Project.  Anecdotal evidence is still valuable for the sake of informal discussion, even if it is unsubstantiated.  We're not trying to make scientific claims or prove hypotheses.  This is a collection of opinions, not a collection of facts.

Reese Stanleywrote:

With all due respect, it's not like there's a lot of objective data, studies or substantive material out there on this topic.  This isn't a peer-reviewed journal... it's Mountain Project.  Anecdotal evidence is still valuable for the sake of informal discussion, even if it is unsubstantiated.  We're not trying to make scientific claims or prove hypotheses.  This is a collection of opinions, not a collection of facts.

I don't have problem with folks sharing their anecdotal experiences, but I do have problem with folks preaching how everyone else can do the same based on their own anecdotal experiences.