|
Post by alexandra on Apr 12, 2016 9:55:08 GMT -7
Hi all, I have been climbing for 2-3 years but I am relatively new to focusing on problems in a specific grade range outdoors. (I am only referring to bouldering here, since I know very little about sport climbing.) The reason I pay attention to the grade system is to figure out some "reasonable" problems to work on, so that (a) I don't waste my time on too easy stuff and (b) I don't waste my time on impossible stuff. However, I have found huge inconsistencies of the assigned grades, even in the same bouldering area, even on the same boulder, which makes me really confused as to what do grades really mean. This inconsistency is magnifying itself every time I climb with my boyfriend, who has been climbing for 12 years and is a very powerful climber, very strong, and always outclimbs me at the gym (but our gym does not have grades, just colored circuits). So this weekend, we both got on the same exact boulder problems which ranged from V4-V6/7. He thought that (what I found) the hardest climb of those was "easy" and completed it in 4-5 tries, while I got on it something like 15 times and finally linked it (but fell off of the top cause I grabbed the wrong hold instead of the jug and then was too beat to try again ). However, he was not able to do even the fist move on a V4 which I send first try. Same thing happened another time we bouldered together for a V7, which he flashed and I couldn't get my ass of the ground and then I could send a V6 nearby in two tries, where he couldn't get his ass of the ground on that problem. I know that some specific style of problems suits us differently, but I have found such a huge gap on the grades that I wanted to see if anyone else can shed some light on why is this happening. How can I possibly climb a (claimed) V6 and a V7 in two tries, feeling like they are V3 and not even be able to get my ass of the ground on some other climbs of the same grade? Which brings me to my main question: when I try to pick climbs I want to work on, what should my criteria be since grades are largely not representative of how difficult I find the climbs and also I don't know anyone else of my body type that has climbed them?
|
|
|
Post by MarkAnderson on Apr 12, 2016 11:11:13 GMT -7
I think a common source of confusion among new climbers, is that they often think a route/problem grade is an intrinsic characteristic of the rock. That is not the case. The grade is merely a human's perception of its difficulty. In some cases, its the average of many humans' perceptions. But, Humans vary a lot. They vary in biomechanical properties like height, reach, finger size/hand size and foot size. They vary in physiological traits like strength, power, endurance. They vary in technical traits like footwork, body awareness, aggressiveness, hand-eye coordination. So Person A might be really good at crimping but have short arms. Reachy problems will feel hard (relative to the norm) for Person A, and crimpy problems will feel easy (relative to the norm). Some enlightened graders take these factors into consideration when grading (thinking "that crimp ladder felt easy for the grade, but I am really good at crimping..."), but in my experience, most do not.
I think this problem is compounded with bouldering, since the problems are so short and relatively homogeneous. When it comes to route climbing, these variations in perception tend to average out more over the length of a climb. So while Person A might think the start is reachy, s/he might find the crimpy finish to be relatively easy, so s/he finds agreement with the norm, although s/he disagreed with the difficulty of the different sections. Boulder problems are really short, and rarely include multiple styles, so if it's reachy, that's all it is. There is no chance for Person A to make up some ground elsewhere on the problem.
I think the issue you are facing is that you are a woman in a male-dominated sport. The vast majority of boulderers are men. Especially when you consider the people who are writing guidebooks and offering strong opinions on grades. Men generally will have longer reach, longer fingers, and possibly more power than you. On the flip side, traditionally women tend to be better on small holds (due to smaller hands/feet), are usually more flexible, and lighter.
I would guess if you thought about each of the problems where each of you struggled relative to the grade, you could come up with a logical reason for each. Maybe one problem is really scrunchy, and your boyfriend can't get into the holds correctly. Maybe another has a really long reach. Maybe one of you is much better at pinches or slopers or pockets (etc).
|
|
|
Post by daustin on Apr 12, 2016 11:13:00 GMT -7
I think you're paying attention to grades for the "right" reasons -- as a guide to what's a reasonable climb for you to try. As you've experienced, grades are extremely subjective. This has to do with individual climbers' different strengths and weaknesses. It can also be magnified when a climb favors a certain body morphology (i.e., extremely reachy, or extremely scrunchy). As a climb sees more and more repeats, the grade should settle into a consensus, but the original grade proposed by the FA creates quite a bit of anchor bias. Also, what qualifies as e.g. consensus V5 in one area can be different from consensus V5 in another area.
This is just one of the immutable truths of climbing, and the only solution is to take grades with a grain of salt. They're still probably your best bet in terms of selection criteria. Other criteria to consider: how cool a climb looks,; recommendations from friends; stars/ratings in a guidebook; who put up the FA and do you generally like their climbs. These will all also be imperfect criteria, but so it goes -- there is no perfect criterion, so focus instead on understanding the imperfections so you can work around them as needed.
|
|
|
Post by erick on Apr 12, 2016 11:37:49 GMT -7
One thing I have found as I've become a more well rounded climber is that grades seem to start making more sense. A few years ago I could go to one area and a 5.11 would feel impossible, but at a different crag 5.11 could feel easy like you mentioned. The problem was not completely with the arbitrary grading system, the problem was that I am was not yet an experienced enough climber to perform at the same level at different areas. This is still a problem for me, for instance at WA's local hardman crag "Index" 5.12a seems impossible for me. But at just about every other crag I have visited in the last few years I have been able to onsight up to 12b. The problem is not the "stiff" grades, its just that Index has a very specific style and the rock is pretty condition dependent. Like was mentioned, I think a lot of the problems are amplified while bouldering since everything is an octave up! For me personally, as I head into my next training cycle I am going to spend a lot of time climbing routes/problems which feel hard for the grade since it seems like the easiest way for me to discover and train my weaknesses.
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Apr 12, 2016 11:39:45 GMT -7
So then why give grades at all? A guidebook with descriptions of the sort: "four star problem, crimpy and reachy crux, medium difficulty in the scale of crimpy problems (or some sort of circuit rating, like color coded) , big reach etc " would do the trick for selecting the appropriate climbs to try. I understand more the point for some sort of grading for route climbing, both because of what mark said and because I assume it is more crucial to find a climbing partner that is about the same level and wants to hang out around the same climbs as you.
Currently, when one says " I am a V-whatever climber", I am not even sure how to interpret that. Does that mean they can climb 90% of the V-whatever grades of all given styles? or does that mean that they have climbed a certain reasonable number of V-whatever climbs of their favorite style and would most likely fail in different styles? (I guess does it even matter what grade one climbs? but I have seen and heard a very large amount of people being very explicit/proud perhaps on what grades they climb so I guess it matters to most).
I always knew that the grades were subjective but I always used to get shut down on harder climbs, so I couldn't tell the difference. Now, I almost feel like I am "cheating" when I say I have climbed V6 and V7, when they consist of all the things I am good at, since those felt like at least 2-3 grades easier. Luckily (or unluckily), the type of problems that I really like are both reachy and powerful, even though these two aspects are not my strong suit (thus the training), so at least most of the time, I am not faced with that "cheating" feeling when I send them.
|
|
|
Post by daustin on Apr 12, 2016 11:54:27 GMT -7
So then why give grades at all? A guidebook with descriptions of the sort: "four star problem, crimpy and reachy crux, medium difficulty in the scale of crimpy problems (or some sort of circuit rating, like color coded) , big reach etc " would do the trick for selecting the appropriate climbs to try. I understand more the point for some sort of grading for route climbing, both because of what mark said and because I assume it is more crucial to find a climbing partner that is about the same level and wants to hang out around the same climbs as you. Currently, when one says " I am a V-whatever climber", I am not even sure how to interpret that. Does that mean they can climb 90% of the V-whatever grades of all given styles? or does that mean that they have climbed a certain reasonable number of V-whatever climbs of their favorite style and would most likely fail in different styles? (I guess does it even matter what grade one climbs? but I have seen and heard a very large amount of people being very explicit/proud perhaps on what grades they climb so I guess it matters to most). I always knew that the grades were subjective but I always used to get shut down on harder climbs, so I couldn't tell the difference. Now, I almost feel like I am "cheating" when I say I have climbed V6 and V7, when they consist of all the things I am good at, since those felt like at least 2-3 grades easier. Luckily (or unluckily), the type of problems that I really like are both reachy and powerful, even though these two aspects are not my strong suit (thus the training), so at least most of the time, I am not faced with that "cheating" feeling when I send them. The answer to all of your questions is "Yes." Seriously though, it's just human nature -- we want ways to quantify and compare our performance vs. our peers, and this is why grades will never go away even if they are a highly subjective system. When people say "I'm a V20 climber", it means that they can consistently onsight V20 -- or that they can climb 90% of V20s… or that they've climbed a reasonable amount of V20s… or that they've climbed a single V20… you get the picture. Ultimately, you just gotta do right by you and be honest. Did you find a specific V7 to send that you knew was perfectly suited to your style and notoriously soft, just so you could claim a higher grade? If yes, I also would probably feel a little weird about saying I've climbed V7. I wouldn't call it cheating, but I'd understand why you'd feel that way. But if your intentions weren't to cherry-pick the easiest V7 just so you could spray about sending V7, then I'd say don't worry about it.
|
|
|
Post by alexandra on Apr 12, 2016 12:15:29 GMT -7
haha, the only reason I got on a V7, for which I knew nothing about, is that my beginner friend was working on a V1 on the same boulder and that V7 was the only other problem on the wall that I hadn't done or tried before. After I climbed it within five minutes I looked at the guide and realized it said V7, and after that I started having all these "philosophical grade doubts" more seriously than before. But on the bright side, this made me realize that I don't have to be afraid when it says V7 or V8 or whatever and I should just climb what looks good to me. As I said, most problems that look good to me are powerful and reachy so I don't normally face this "cheating" issue, but at the same time I don't like that feeling that comes with "easy sending" hard grades...
|
|
|
Post by jessebruni on Apr 12, 2016 13:33:13 GMT -7
Currently, when one says " I am a V-whatever climber", I am not even sure how to interpret that. When someone says they are a "V7 climber" * If that person has been climbing for less than a year and only climbs indoors it means: "I did a boulder problem in the gym that someone wrote V7 on one time after working it for weeks"
* If that person has been climbing for a few years with some outdoor experience it means: "I have a done a few problems graded V7 indoors and outdoors. Possibly some harder."
* If that person has been climbing for 5-7 years with lots of outdoor experience it means: "I have flashed up to V7 outdoors on multiple rock types, but not harder"
* If that person has been climbing for 7-10 years with lots of outdoor experience it means: "I can reasonably expect to climb V7 anywhere in the world within a matter of attempts"
* If that person has been climbing for 10 or more years with lots of outdoor experience it means: "I climb harder than you can imagine and I don't want you to feel bad so I'll pretend V7 is still challenging for me"
TL;DR Sarcastic response, it doesn't mean anything.
|
|
|
Post by MarkAnderson on Apr 12, 2016 14:20:58 GMT -7
I always knew that the grades were subjective but I always used to get shut down on harder climbs, so I couldn't tell the difference. Now, I almost feel like I am "cheating" when I say I have climbed V6 and V7, when they consist of all the things I am good at, since those felt like at least 2-3 grades easier. Luckily (or unluckily), the type of problems that I really like are both reachy and powerful, even though these two aspects are not my strong suit (thus the training), so at least most of the time, I am not faced with that "cheating" feeling when I send them. That's a great attitude to have. It will serve you well.
|
|
|
Post by aikibujin on Apr 13, 2016 4:49:58 GMT -7
when I try to pick climbs I want to work on, what should my criteria be since grades are largely not representative of how difficult I find the climbs and also I don't know anyone else of my body type that has climbed them? I think daustin gave a really good answer, you can pick a problem to work on based on aesthetics and such. In my opinion this is the best thing about bouldering, the freedom to explore. I love getting on a boulder and just climb whatever looks good to me. I look for my own lines and create my own problems. Any classic problem should be pretty obvious right away. If you can't see the line, it's probably too contrived. Who cares if it's too easy? I've done hundreds of problems that were easier than I thought, but bouldering problems are short enough that it didn't matter. And if it's too hard, I'll fall off a whole bunch of times, tuck my tail between my legs and go look for something else. It's so easy to bail from bouldering problems (unless you're into highballing) it doesn't hurt to try whatever you come across, even if it looks impossible. That's why I don't even own any bouldering guidebooks, but I have a whole bunch of them for sport and trad climbing. I never jump on a route without finding out its grade first, because you have to commit quite a bit of time to climb a route even if it's super easy, and if a route is too hard, you may have to leave gear behind in order to bail.
|
|
|
Post by asdfgh on Apr 20, 2016 10:32:07 GMT -7
I think a better way to think about grades is "VX +- B" where VX is the grade from the guide and the +-B is some tolerance. So the interesting thing is what is B for me, on this rock type, in this style, with this guide book author. It's probably safe to say that the farther you are from the average height of an American male, the larger B will tend to be. So if you're 5'0" (or 6'8"), some V6's will feel V3 and others will feel V9, so your B is 3ish. So the grade becomes V6(+-3). If you're 5'10", your B is closer to 0, so V6 becomes V6(+-.5).
Also guidebooks are generally written by stubborn, sandbagging or ego inflating idiots, and the grades are pretty much just the opinion of the author (who probably hasn't done the problem in years, if ever) and maybe a couple friends. (Source: I've written one)
|
|
|
Post by MarkAnderson on Apr 20, 2016 14:56:10 GMT -7
(Source: I've written one) Haha.
Good points asdfgh.
|
|