Stickclipping a redpoint attempt

JohnWesely wrote: I am going to make myself very clear. You have no idea what you are talking about. The whole purpose of sport climbing is to remove the danger element. Repeat that a few times aloud, preferably in front of mirror. If you want to pretend that is not the case and forgo using a stickclip so you can brag to your friends about how pure and hardcore you are on a clip up, be my guest. Now to answer your question, stick clipping the first bolt removes a significant amount of danger from the climb. Top roping is top roping. As to your trad comment, of course it would be lame to aid the crux of a route and call it a free ascent, but that is complete non sequitar. For what its worth, I rarely use a stick clip.

So top roping and sport climbing aren't significantly different enough to make a distinction but trad climbing and sport climbing are so astronomically different from one another that they should go by two different standards? Still didn't hear an answer to how much top roping is too much.

basic.

muttonface wrote: Trolling is saying something ridiculous or controversial just for the sake of attention and responses. Trollers don't really place credence in what they're saying. You absolutely believe what you're saying is true. That's not a troll. That's an excuse now that you've kind of gathered an inkling that you couldn't be more uninformed and incorrect.

Isn't that the sign of a successful troll, completely convincing people that that is what you whole-heartedly believe?

If it's good enough for her, it's good enough for me..:-)

http://vimeo.com/14038459

Jason N. wrote: Isn't that the sign of a successful troll, completely convincing people that that is what you whole-heartedly believe?

No. Trolling is dropping some bait in the water, then leaning back in your captain's chair drinking your beer and letting the boat do all the work [see OP of this thread]. When you get all worked up and respond every other post, putting more effort into it then everyone else combined, you've only trolled yourself.

Tevis Blom wrote: I don't really believe the grade one climbs at makes them a beginner or not. What are you, like 18? So you are saying that ~80% of climbers don't actually sport climb at all, and that everyone who climbs at 5.10 is just a beginner. ".

Of course you don't. If you did you might take more time to learn how to push yourself and graduate to the intermediate routes which are so much more fun than the beginner routes. Usually the harder you sport climb the better the routes are, I promise.

Instead of calling you a beginner, which you clearly are not, I will label you a chufftard. That is what people who have been climbing the same grade for the last 20 years are called. Especially ones who insist their mediocrity is the highest form of ethics and dictate those ethics to the masses.

Yes, that is what I am saying. Unless they are older than 50 they are beginners to sport climbing.

BTW, I fish too so see you out there.

Johny Q wrote: Unless they are older than 50 they are beginners to sport climbing.

Thank god for that.

Ryan Kelly wrote: No. Trolling is dropping some bait in the water, then leaning back in your captain's chair drinking your beer and letting the boat do all the work [see OP of this thread]. When you get all worked up and respond every other post, putting more effort into it then everyone else combined, you've only trolled yourself.

Brother be trollin' hisself!

Belie dis man, my peeps. He been trollin' since before they been bridges, mo' fucka! Fish throw theyselves at this man's feet, biotch! His name means "hook" in Norwegian, homie! NEEDS I SAY MO'!?!!?!!!?

M LaViolette Jr. wrote:Some highball boulders have a bolt on top that people use to lower off with. If I think the boulder is scary and dangerous can I stick clip the lower off bolt from the ground, climb up on a top rope and call it a legitimate send?

of course you sent the route...on top rope

cant we just call it a pinkpoint and get over it?

mobley wrote:cant we just call it a pinkpoint and get over it?

Back to Page 1 noob!

Andrew Haag wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6yHcvNJ0NPU&context=C36b33dbADOEgsToPDskKNIqJCSgbm8EYP1ad9XGbB

Jesus Christo. I couldn't even make it through three minutes. Some people simply need more productive shit to do with their time. Good luck with that.

Edit: 2.5 minutes

M LaViolette Jr. wrote: So top roping and sport climbing aren't significantly different enough to make a distinction but trad climbing and sport climbing are so astronomically different from one another that they should go by two different standards? Still didn't hear an answer to how much top roping is too much.

Yes. Sport climbing and Trad climbing take an entirely different approach to climbing. Bringing a trad mindset to sport makes you look like a doofus. You are top roping too much if you are doing it to make the route easier instead of safer.

JohnWesely wrote: Yes. Sport climbing and Trad climbing take an entirely different approach to climbing. Bringing a trad mindset to sport makes you look like a doofus. You are top roping too much if you are doing it to make the route easier instead of safer.

So we agree, aiding through a dangerous section of a trad climb and calling it free would be lame. But you can't fathom the idea that some people might think that top roping through a dangerous part on a sport climb and calling it a redpoint is equally lame? Come on.

If making sure that keeping the integrity of the diffuculty level stays intact but throwing as much risk out the window as you see fit, then how do we go about this situation? As someone else posted earlier (csproul, i think) some climbs may actually be harder to top rope than lead. If that were found to be the situation on a particular route would the redpoint distinction go to the harder/safe top rope ascent and the easier/dangerous lead ascent count for nothing? Of course not. Why? Because redpointing is a distinction only for leading and not for top roping, regardless of the difficulty. The important deciding factor is the risk involved on the lead! Risk is an integral part of leading that you cannot just do away with and pretend it's the same thing, it's not. You can tell yourself in the mirror until you are blue in the face that stick clipping is not top roping, but it is exactly the same thing, just on a smaller scale. Again, a quantitative difference, not qualitative.

If the reason that redpoints don't count on top rope is just because it's easier and not because it's any less risky, that's because you don't have to stop and place the draws and clip them, which you also don't have to do when you stick clip, therefore easier, so your argument doesn't carry much weight on either front.

I also agree that trad and sport are two different games and to expect the same "rules" to apply to both of them is unreasonable. But I think that "redpoint" should be a pretty unambiguous term that has the same meaning across all the disciplines. Occam's Razor says essentially that the easiest solution to a problem is always the best one. In order to simply cut out all the subjectivity and view the whole think objectively it makes most sense to say that because stick clipping is a form of top roping it does not count as a redpoint, whether you think it's too scary and dangerous to do the lead without one or not.

M LaViolette Jr. wrote: As someone else posted earlier (csproul, i think) some climbs may actually be harder to top rope than lead. If that were found to be the situation on a particular route would the redpoint distinction go to the harder/safe top rope ascent and the easier/dangerous lead ascent count for nothing? Of course not.

Harder or more dangerous, to top rope than lead? Please explain a situation where cleanly top roping a route is going to be more physically difficult than cleanly leading.

csproul wrote: In many instances TRing a steep sport climb is harder than leading it.

We'll let him answer that.

M LaViolette Jr. wrote: We'll let him answer that.

Is there any part of your post where you know what you're talking about?

Ryan Kelly wrote: Is there any part of your post where you know what you're talking about?

Let me say this, I don't think that can actually be shown to be true. But treated as a hypothetical situation (which someone else does believe to be true) it can still be used to illustrate the point that the redpoint distinction is not derived from which is the more difficult style of ascent.

Ryan Kelly wrote: Harder or more dangerous, to top rope than lead? Please explain a situation where cleanly top roping a route is going to be more physically difficult than cleanly leading.

Horizontal roofs. Trust me on this one, brah.

But M La violet still has no idea what he's talking about.

camhead wrote: Horizontal roofs. Trust me on this one, brah. But M La violet still has no idea what he's talking about.

For cleanly climbing the route? How?