Tough Gumby

I would agree with the assesment here - the route is definitely not a 5.9, more like a 5.8- or 5.7+. Aug 31, 2006

Another opinion: I'd say that a route that involves pulling an overhanging bulge while traversing right on slightly reachy mid-size holds is probably not an easy 5.8 liable to be downgraded to 5.7...

A 5.7 climber attempting this route might take an ugly swinging fall if they blow the crux.

Didn't particularly enjoy seeing a bunch of barely dry blood spatter at the base of another sandbagged Mt. Lemmon sport route a few years ago. Dec 6, 2006

Just wonder if you guys are starting on the short face below the ramp or doing the third class ramp to the bulge. It might be harder if you do the bottom moves. It probably is only 5.8 or hard 8. I haven't a clue. Jun 2, 2007

i agree with christian. i'm a moderate-level climber who managed to lead a sandbagged 5.8 a couple of weekends ago. if i had blown the crux i would almost certainly have broken bones and left a bloody stain on the route. i wouldn't have attempted the lead if i had known it was that close to my TR level. good climbers tend to downgrade moderate routes to easy because to them they are easy climbs. just remember that when you're calling it a 5.7, you're essentially OKing the route for a 5.7 leader. whether you mean to or not. Sep 7, 2007

No....ratings are merely a guideline. They are not a substitute for YOUR judgement. Sandbags happen. No one is "OKing" you for anything. Except perhaps to quit climbing altogether. Sep 7, 2007

um...yeah wow. Sep 7, 2007

Kalkin,
Just hang in there and in time that route may seem a lot easier to you! Sep 7, 2007

ok, apparently my post was misleading because it seems that two people have now misunderstood me. i've never even tried tough gumby, i just don't see any reason to downgrade moderate routes to easy because 5.11 (or better) climbers find them easy. Sep 10, 2007

Kalkin, my comment probably seemed harsh, but I'm really trying to do you a favor by pointing out that all the responsibility falls on you. There is no recourse. I may be harsh but gravity is harsher. You have to judge the safety of the situation and be ready to back off (at the RIGHT time) if things don't seem right. You should climb every route as though you don't know the rating.

Sandbags happen. Most of the guys putting up new routes can't tell a 5.7 from a 5.8. Plus some of us tend to sandbag by about a letter grade anyway. I think that's a good thing because it helps to keep ratings from inflating out of control. Sep 10, 2007

it did seem harsh, but after i got over being offended i took a few minutes to think about it and realized it was a valid point (aside from the quit climbing part). i do also realize that sandbagging happens and i understand the cause/need for it, but it's not the people who put up the climbs i have a problem with. those guys are doing us all a big favor. i just don't like it when people climb the route and then tell everyone that it's way easier than the listed grade, especially if the grade is way below their climbing ability to begin with.

but in the end, like you said, it is my responsibility to watch out for those things like anyone else. Sep 10, 2007

They're all good points, although 5.11+ leaders usually don't bother to try to downrate a 5.8/5.8 + route, so I don't believe Charles Reid is such a leader.

I'll try to describe in objective terms why I don't think this is even close to a 5.7 route.

This route involves about a 10 foot stretch of overhanging terrain. I believes for a route involving such terrain to be 5.7 (even 5.7+) the holds on that terrain should be fairly large and juggy and the moves should be fairly straightforward. The overhanging terrain on this route involves midsize holds and fairly awkward traversing moves. The bolts are far enough apart (or were, I understand they may have been removed to restore the route to its original state) in this section and the area below the overhang flat enough that a fall would be ugly.

Therefore I decided to post up a long time ago so that people who aren't completely solid on what I believe is a hard 5.8 route might have another opinion to consider when deciding whether to lead it or not. I believe this is not an unreasonable concern considering every other route surrounding it is 5.6 at most and what this entails in terms of the climbers you might find there.

But people will almost always not have the luxury of several opinions on a route, so like jbak said, trust your instincts to stay safe.



Sep 10, 2007

Mt. Lemmons "Veteran Climber's" can "Free Solo" this route in street shoe's in the rain! Sep 10, 2007

Alex Huber can free solo 5.14a.. I'll bet that Huber dude could free solo "Tough Gumby" even if they cut his arms and legs off...Like that guy in the Monthy Python movie :-) Sep 10, 2007

psh christian routinely free solos 5.10s in his approach shoes. that's why we call him "approach shoes christian"...or at least i call him that and i'm trying to get the nickname to stick.

and about what i said about 5.11 climbers downgrading routes...it turns out i'm retarded and i misread something, so my bad. i thought charles led 11s. (-_-) Sep 11, 2007

this is probably the best route on the wall. Not even close to 5.9. I'd say that the PG13 is uncalled for as well, the route is well bolted and the climb is slightly overhanging. Nov 14, 2007

Fun route. Plenty of pro and not too hard, although it can be mental because of wind once you get above the bushes. Oct 3, 2010

I'll throw in my two cents.

My feeling is that this short route is pretty steep to be called 5.7+, and the direct start has some thin moves. I gave it 5.9- but took away the PG13 rating.

Don't forget that we are splitting hairs here over one of the okay, but not spectacular lines on the mountain. We all know that climbing is dangerous, and if you attempt a route before you have the skills to pull it off, then it doesn't matter what it's rated. Nov 27, 2011