Ebs & Flows: Booms & Busts: Valley FAs 1954-1980


Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 20 of total 24 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Roger Breedlove

Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Topic Author's Original Post - Dec 15, 2009 - 10:09pm PT
These graphs are taken from data sorts of Ed Hartouni’s Yosemite Valley First Ascent data base.

The fall off in the number of first ascents in the late 1960s is well documented. I have always seen this data as it relates to free climbing activity, but assumed that aid activity followed in lockstep. However, separating the first ascents into free and aid shows that the Grade V and VI aid climbing more or less kept chugging along at about the pace in earlier years.

An alternate explanation for the lull is that apparent higher levels of climbing in the early 60s and the period in the 70s are the oddities. This may be true in a longer time frame (I don’t have good data after the 70s). Pratt and Sacherer in the early 60s and the flood of new talent and energy in the 70s will always stand out. But, as I have stated elsewhere, I think the fall off in the late 60s is a little odd, for a couple of reasons. There were good climbers in the Valley in the late 1960s, Bridwell among them, and there were great routes to be climbed, as evidenced by what happened starting in 1970, and the difficulty of the routes done in the early 70s was not so different than the standards set in the late 1960s.

Several things have motivated me to pull this data together. First of all, I have asserted for several years here on ST that there was a lull or slackening in the free climbing ascent activity in Yosemite Valley in the period of 1967 to 1970. This was initially just an observation of looking at graphs posted by Ed several years ago. I was initially struck by the implications regarding Jim Bridwell’s apparent massive increase in productivity starting in 1970. This in turn led to my comments and notes on the impact Barry Bates, Mark Klemens and Peter Haan had on starting the 70s free climbing boom. That thread is here: Barry Bates and Mark Klemens--Valley free climbing

This also was the spark that set off my essay on the affect the Stonemasters had on Yosemite Valley climbing starting in 1972. John Long has used a short version of that post in his new book.

Another aspect of my pointing out the lull is that Pat Ament has taken me to task, pretty much at every possible occasion, for seeming to downplaying the significance of his FFA ascent of The Slack, Center, the first 5.11 in the Valley.

Pat tends to look at the history of climbing as individual climbs in isolation with an emphasis on their difficulty. My approach starts with that information and asks a ‘so what?’ question, to try to figure out if there is a story behind why a climber spent so much energy to do a particular climb and, more importantly to me, what follow-on actions did other climbers take as a result of that ascent or style of climbing. I try to think about climbing history the way I think some disinterested climbing historian will think about it in 50 or 100 years. I lament that we do not have a complete written source of Yosemite climbing history past the 1960s. We lost the details of the old prose style guide books; we have lost many of the climbs and names with ‘best of’ guides; and the stuff we do have is more akin to personal reflections and spectacular pictures rather than integrated histories that take a stab at linking it all together. We are also losing, one by one, the memories and voices that have the knowledge and distance to report and reflect on stuff that occurred 40 or 50 years ago.

I decided several years ago not to write a history of 1970s climbing in Yosemite (I really did consider it!). However, we do have a substantial part of that climbing community that reads and posts on SuperTopo. So I have taken more time and effort over the past few years to document the bits of the story I have access to. I also think we, collectively, have been writing an updated Yosemite history from original sources in a wiki mode, a “Camp 4a” (maybe with an R) so to speak. It is a lot easier to do a wiki history than what Pat did with “Wizards of Rock” or Steve did with “Camp 4,” but, it requires encouraging climbers to share their thoughts and it requires thoughtful responses, especially to ‘original’ sources (read old-as-dirt sources).

I have no issues with Pat’s approach to reporting history—his “Wizards of Rock” is a great source since Pat has included original source correspondence. But from my perspective it is more interesting to place the details within a flow of influences, the way we all actually lived and climbed in our own day and within our own community. A great example of the sort of thing that I find interesting is the Frank Sacherer thread here on ST. It brought out not just the particulars of Frank’s approach to climbing but also the impact his climbing had on others. (Would we have otherwise known first hand Jeff Lowe's decision to focus on all-free ascents based in part of his reflections of Frank's focus on all-free ascents?) We also saw the unique and very valuable opportunities that SuperTopo gives us to get direct source material--people post up when there are interesting conversations about their friends and climbing partners. The same sort of relationships came out of my thread on the impact of Barry Bates’ and Mark Klemens’ routes on the Stonemasters and other climbers of their generation when they arrived in the Valley, where climbers who came just a few years later posted their thoughts about 1970-71 climbs being the benchmarks that underwrote the spectacular climbs done in the 1970s.

In these two different approaches, individual climbs versus the flow of influence, the discussion are grounded in the same set of facts. In my approach, I don’t pay as much attention to Pat’s ascent of the Slack as he would like me to. Of course, my pointing out that there was a slackening in the late 60s doesn’t diminish the great routes that were done in Yosemite in 1967-1969. These include Pat’s “Slack Center,” (rated 5.11 until the block came out and created a great hand jam), Tom Higgins’ free ascent of “Serenity” crack (rated 5.11 until further pin scaring made it easier), Robbins’ “Meatgrinder,” Robbins' "Nutcracker," Bridwell’s free ascent of the “Stovelegs.” Frederick’s ascent of “Edge of Night,” “Triple Direct” on El Cap by Bridwell and Schmitz, “The Prow” by Robbins and Denny, “Tis-sa-ack” by Robbins and Peterson. Also Tom Higgins and Bob Kamps climbed “Lucky Streaks” on Fairview Dome in 1967.

This last observation points out the just because folks are not doing a lot of new stuff in the Valley doesn’t mean that they are not getting lots of cool stuff done somewhere else—“Lucky Streaks” is a great climb. (As an aside, after my accidental retirement from climbing in 1980, I made it back to the Valley in the 1986. I was with my family and only had part of a day to do any climbing. I only had my shoes and a harness, and I hadn’t climbed any thing hard in seven years and had done no leading. But I was not going home without a prize. I asked Bruce Brossman to guide me up “Lucky Streaks.” A perfect day on a perfect climb, thanks to Bruce, Tom and Bob.)

This thread is to establish the statistical data that the production of climbs in the late 1960s fell off from the middle 60s so the characterization of that period as a 'lull' stops just being a free-floating opinion. More importantly, it is also allows us to see if the first ascent data supports Dick Erb’s assessment that the slackening of new routes was driven by Jim Madsen’s death.

A few days ago, Dick Erb posted a poignant recollection of the death of Jim MadsenThe Death of Jim Madsen, and I asked Dick if he thought Jim’s death had anything to do with the fall off in climbing activity in the Valley. While it may seem obvious to late 1960s climbers in the Valley who were close to Jim, I had never made any connection between Jim’s death and the fall off of new ascents. Dick was pretty unequivocal in saying it had a lot to do with it:

Roger, you ask if there was a connection between Madsen's death and a lull in Valley climbing. There was, and the biggest reason was that he was not there. Jim had climbed more grade VI's in a shorter period of time than anyone ever had as well as doing some of the hardest free climbs in the Valley as well. He was obsessive, strong, and talented. I never heard him talk about wanting to be the best climber, but I did hear him talk about wanting to do the biggest and hardest climbs he could find. The routes on El Cap that he and Kim Schmitz were knocking off one by one in record time he said were practice for the five thousand foot walls he wanted to do in Patagonia. But, alas, we all found out he was no unstoppable force.

“We the young ones thought of ourselves as the younger generation. The older generation, Robbins, Kor, Pratt, etc. were not even ten years older but we tended to look up to them and thought of them as the better climbers. There certainly were some great accomplishments here and there from the younger generation, but overall it wasn't even close to the rise in standards and opening up of the big walls that preceded us. Even Bridwell, talented as he was, never really broke through until the next generation came and he teamed up with them. Jim Madsen was the exception, but just as he was breaking through, he died.”

Discussing the late 60s Valley climbing is a bit of a mine field: many of the people around during that period were friends of mine, and I am not so comfortable asking a rude question that sounds like, “Why didn’t you get more done?” For starters, my own productivity was pretty slim when I was climbing well—but not on the cutting edge--and there are only a few individuals who for whatever reason had super productive periods. In any case, Dick’s response to my question made me feel more comfortable about responding. I have never discussed with Dick my take on the late 60s lull or Bridwell’s place in it, and I doubt that Dick has been around on ST long enough to have read those old threads. My response was carefully worded since Madsen’s death is a personal matter for his friends, but Dick gave a cogent and powerful reason to explain what happened in the late 60s, and I didn’t want it to pass quickly.

"Good Morning Dick. Thanks for the note. That is a powerful piece of the puzzle of what happened in those years between the earlier 60s climbers and the 1970/71 seasons.

“It always seems a bit mysterious to me why certain periods seem to take off and some sort of slacken—there always seem to be good climbers around, but something has to happen to cause them to push into new methods or terrains. Or course climber’s tastes change and with changing tastes some areas are more favorable than others. But the 1967 to 1970 period in the Valley always seemed to me to be an oddity. There were really good climbers in the Valley during that time, not the least of which were Bridwell and Schmitz. The fading of the earlier generation, the names you mention, is easy to see as the sum of the individuals moving on to other things in their lives. And, it easy to see the affect, in the 1970/71 season, when Barry Bates, Mark Klemens and Peter Haan shook up the place with hard free climbing, all of which caused/allowed Bridwell to come into his own as the Valley impresario.

“From a historical perspective, Madsen’s position in the Valley as the strongest young climber with a vision and drive probably would have been the piece to drive climbers to push the envelop—whatever that special communal catalyst is—and his death, as you confirm, would have just as easily have created a void that didn’t get filled until Barry and Mark showed up and Peter took off his belay.”

Pat took the opportunity to take a swipe at me for my comment, pointing out that I wasn’t there. Pat seemed to have missed that the basis of my response was Dick’s statement. Dick was certainly there and he is an unimpeachable source. In any case, I decided to take a look at the first ascent data to see if I could find data driven support Dick’s comment. This is easy to do with Ed's data base. One thing led to another and pretty soon I was trying to sort climbers into generations, as Dick alludes to, based on when they started doing first ascents and who they tended to climb with.

These charts are the result:

What is striking about this graph is 1), the start of the late-60s climbing generation petered out early, at least as compared to the generations before and later, and 2), the early 70s generation somehow just showed up in mass, with no introduction; this is also not reflected in the shape of ascent activity of any other generation. As an aside, I took the effort to further classify the 1970s climbers who John Long identifies as Stonemasters into its own generation. This includes Gib Lewis, Mike Graham, Rick Accomazzo, Tobin Sorenson, John Yablonski, Rab Carrington, Richard Harrison, Jim Pettigrew, Werner Braun, John Bachar, Rik Rieder, Ed Barry, John Long, Ron Kauk, Mark Chapman, Dale Bard, and Kevin Worrall in order of number of first ascents up until 1980.

For a point of reference, the climbers in the early 70s who are not considered Stonemasters include, more or less in increasing order of number of climbs, Billy Westbay, Art Higbee, Phil Gleason, Ron Fawcett, Bev Johnson, Hugh Burton, Pete Livesey, Henry Barber, Bruce Hawkins, Peter Haan, Roger Breedlove, Mike Briedenbach (Fig), Vern Clevenger, Chris Falkenstein, John Bragg, Jerry Anderson, Steve Wunsch, Jim Donini, Bill Price, Barry Bates, Charlie Porter, George Meyers, Mark Klemens, Rick Sylvester, and Ray Jardine.

All of this analysis is based on the data of who is listed on a first ascent or a first free ascent of Valley routes from 1954 (Warren's first) to 1980. It is democratic in that it includes all routes, easy, hard, starred and clunkers. I did exclude from the summary graphs almost all one-time only first ascent climbers (examples of exceptions are Bugs McKeith, Roger Briggs, Pete Minks, Molly Higgins, Jim Erickson, Jim Dunn, and Dianna Hunter; there are also names in the list of late 70s climbers who are just getting started.)

Since the goal is too look closely at the late 1960s, I identified specific climbers who where active in the earlier part of the decade. I took the approach that each generation seems to have a shape of first ascent activity by year so I went back a few years and tried to identify climbers who could have potentially participated in more climbing in the last years of the decade. This is thin ice to support too many conclusions since it is very speculative to say someone would have done so-and-so, if such-and-such hadn’t happened. Nevertheless, there seems to be a reasonable group of experienced climbers who might have been expected to do more in the late 60s.

I organized this chart so that it both shows the shape of ascents by year for climbers whose names appear in the mid-60s ascents and shows their activity through the mid-70s. I put Jim’s data on top so that it is easier to see his uptick in 1970-71 and also so it is easier to see the fall off of other potential first ascent team members in the late 1960s. There were lots of other earlier generation climbers who were still active in this period (you’ll have to refer to the chart up-post to eye-ball the difference). Jim Madsen is the bright yellow diamond in 1967. He did six first ascents.

I think I see in the data the affect Dick is talking about.

There is a caveat here also: there is lots of climbing and are lots of climbers who enjoy themselves doing established routes and do not have much interest in investing the time and the energy to find new stuff and figure out how to get up them in good style, knowing that there is good likelihood that the finished route will be only so-so. My only defense is that our tradition only counts first ascents, first free ascents, and some solos, and some timed ascents. We don’t keep public records of the absolute pleasure we get from wonderful days spent on the great routes that have stood the test of time.

Okay enough about caveats. Let’s get on with the next chapter of Camp 4a R (X?)

Dec 15, 2009 - 10:21pm PT
Awesome analysis, Roger! Be interesting to look at the raw number of pitches done. Would that push the Bird into the stratosphere?!
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 15, 2009 - 10:24pm PT
very very nice, Roger, this sort of consideration is why I put that database together.. I'm happy that it has been useful in sorting out some of the details...


Roger Breedlove

Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 15, 2009 - 10:32pm PT
Uh, Mimi, can we have a word?

Pitches? You want my head to explode? It would be very messy. This data is not pretty, dry confetti.

Speaking of mining the data, I disassociated the route information from the first ascent parties. I have always thought it would be interesting to see the results of keeping track of who climbed with whom. I have never figured out a sensible way to do it in Excel.

Ed, I have learned so much about my own time in the Valley becuase of your data base. Even with this effort, I ran across names of climbing partners and camp mates I had forgotten about. Good stuff.

Trad climber
Dec 15, 2009 - 10:37pm PT
Amazing graphics!! I wonder about 2 other variables, military service ie. Vietnam, and climbing trips to other areas...

A long way from where I started
Dec 15, 2009 - 10:57pm PT
Roger you really -- really -- need to get outdoors. Even if its just walking the dog, you really have to step away from that computer.

Dec 15, 2009 - 11:41pm PT
Very funny, Roger, the holidays are approaching...lots of free time. Don't listen to that Ghost!

Someone with Access database programming savvy needs to step up to do that sort of compiling.

Ed, your efforts are much appreciated.
Dick Erb

June Lake, CA
Dec 15, 2009 - 11:44pm PT
Good one Ghost.
Although I must say it is interesting.
Mighty Hiker

Vancouver, B.C.
Dec 16, 2009 - 12:20am PT
Thanks, Roger - fascinating stuff, and an example that may be of use in another context.

You should probably add Steve Sutton to the list of those active in the early 1970s?
Clint Cummins

Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
Dec 16, 2009 - 04:16am PT
Good fun!

When I see this, I see the 1964 Roper guidebook, and people heading out in 1964-65 to pick off the undone climbs and FFAs.
Same thing with the 1970 Roper guidebook, but in 1971 people had EBs, too.
Then big declines after those years.

Also, in 1968 & 1969, there were no *** FAs. The Valley was looking a little climbed out with the available technology, perhaps.
Once EBs appeared in 1971 and the 5.11 grade was solidified, the sky was the limit, and so many good routes became possible.
In 1970 there were 4 *** FAs, 3 with Bridwell.
In 1971, 7 *** FAs, including 3 with Bridwell and 3 with Bates.

In the FA list, I think Chuck Pratt should be included. He had 9 FAs in 1965.
Also, Gordon Webster had 5, and Layton Kor had 4.
If you included FFAs in this graph, you'd want to include Frank Sacherer.

For 1970-71, you should include Rick Sylvester.
Steve Grossman

Trad climber
Seattle, WA
Dec 16, 2009 - 11:13am PT
Amazing data treatment, Roger! Thanks for slicing and dicing the history in this way and for wanting more than speculation on the tie-in to Madsen's accident.

Jim Logan mentions a letter from Madsen that indicated some dissatisfaction or frustration with the valley scene and I wonder how much the lull in FA's had to do with people breaking away to other areas alpine climbing or simply exploring? That shining goal of super alpinism in the great ranges certainly was in everybodys mind once YC wrote his piece on Modern Yosemite climbing in 1963.

A sidenote- Chuck Pratt is the only climber to have an FA or FFA on all five Cathedral summits! The Warbler has four in the bag.
Roger Breedlove

Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 16, 2009 - 11:24am PT
Just a note to Anders and Clint: all climbers are included in the data. However, the charts that show climber's first ascents exclude climbers who only have one ascent, with some exceptions and in the chart for showing what happened after Jim Madsen's deathl, I only include the most active mid-60s generation and thier further ascents.


All climbers are included in my statistics and the main graph. Steve Sutton is in the graphed data but since he only did three ascents in the Valley I didn’t catch up his name in my list. (As I pointed out in my initial post, this approach is only useful to see the overarching activity levels. It doesn’t really show the climbs and climbers who pushed the edge of the envelope; climbers such as Steve.)

The number of climbs and climbers who started the 70s boom stands out. Given the prolific climbing of the “Stonemasters,” I thought it was interesting to see the separation of the 70s first ascent data into non-Stonemasters and Stonemasters. It seemed that some readers would ask, “Well, who were those climbers?” so I included a partial list.


Regarding the chart of the mid-60s climbers, this is a specific test of Dick's comment about the difference in younger climber versus the better established climbers from the late 50s and early 60s and how this group was affected by Jim's death. Taking a cue from Dick's reponse to my question, I only showed younger climbers who might have been expected to have higher levels of first ascents in 1967-1969. Once I had picked those named, I ran their activities out until they stopped or I reached 1980.

Amongst climbers in this mid-60s group Bridwell is pretty unique in extending his first ascents out for so many years. Kim Schmitz also kept coming back. Everyone else had moved on for one reason or another.

Your comment about the introduction of Roper’s guidebooks is interesting. However, they need to be applied to the graph that includes all of the ascents, not just the ones that I used to test Dick’s comment.


Trad climber
Lee, NH
Dec 16, 2009 - 11:29am PT
Roger, since you're having fun with the graphs ... another way to visualize the addition of new routes is through a cumulative graph, showing the total number of routes as a function of time. The boom & bust periods you graph then turn into a series of asymmetrical escalating S-curves (Gompertz seems to work as a model), with takeoffs often marking a breakthrough to new standards (or technologies, or rule changes), and slowdowns a diminishing-returns phase due to depletion of potential first ascents at that standard.

If one were young and brash enough to write an academic piece about this, he might link the pattern to more general theories of innovation, and note climbing's character as a "cumulative neophilic" activity in which the elite needs first ascents, but each FA depletes the potential supply thus creating pressures to break through.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 16, 2009 - 11:52am PT
I had done an analysis trying to determine the time that each grade was established:


and came to a conclusion different than Chiloe's conjecture that climbs are a finite resource. My conclusion is controversial (apparently because it is based on science, climbing, to some, should be considered a spiritual pursuit) because what I think the limited resource is is people.

see also http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=226916&msg=678535#msg678535

It is the access to the population of gifted climbers that ultimately limits the top grades of the sport, and that probably has most to do with training to be in peak form. The number of people available to climb at these high grades is limited, the distribution is not flat and has "tails" at the high and low end with some mean value peak... enough so to fit the logistics curve (so in the limit of a large sample it tends towards gaussian).

My prediction is the top grade, and the date it will be reached. I may have to adjust it for population growth (which I have not done) as that provides a larger pool of talent.

One comment on the analysis. It comes from individual experience of putting up routes in Yosemite Valley. I have been involved in many FAs over these last few years, once you start down that path your eye sees the possibilities for routes everywhere. The number of potential routes in the Valley is still very much larger than the estimated 3000 to 5000 that have been done (only about 3000 have been reported). One would question doing some of the routes that are possible out balances the desire to leave them be (Debbie complains that we are "gardening out" unique biological communities, she may be right, there isn't a lot of study on these niches but it is known in the farm intensive midwest that cliff communities are the last refuge of native species).

Roger's analysis also uses his personal knowledge as a guide, which is very important initially at least, to try to tease a story out of this limited, documented information on climbing.
Roger Breedlove

Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 16, 2009 - 11:56am PT
Chiloe, I notice that you have a caveat neatly imbeddedd to hide behind: I ain't 'young and brash' no more.

However, if you want the spreadsheet send me an e-mail.

Ed, the data that I extracted between 1954 and 1980 includes 1034 first ascents (aid routes that are freed are counted twice) put up by 1112 climbers with a total of 2248 climber ascents.

Roger Breedlove

Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 16, 2009 - 11:58am PT

Roger Breedlove

Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 16, 2009 - 12:03pm PT

Everyone is included in their respective generation depending on when they started doing first ascents. Bridwell is included in the Mid 1960s generation. The rest of the names you mentioned are included in the Stonemasters.

I only listed the non-Stonemasters from the early 1970s since they do not have a group identity.

I have edited my initial post to make it more clear.

BTW, you take the first prize in Valley first ascents within your generation, at least according to the data base of first ascents up to 1980: 40 ascents (tied for 4th with Warren Harding when considering all climbs in the 1954-1980 period).

Trad climber
Lee, NH
Dec 16, 2009 - 12:12pm PT
I notice that you have a caveat neatly imbedded to hide behind: I ain't 'young and brash' no more.

Hah, it's even more imbedded than that. I actually wrote such a paper, way back when I was young and brash.
Roger Breedlove

Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Topic Author's Reply - Dec 16, 2009 - 12:18pm PT
Here is the count of first ascents per climber included in the data base up to 1980 (down to 5). I have in my head that Jim had something like 90s ascents. Did Jim do 12 ascents since 1980?

Jim Bridwell 78
Chuck Pratt 47
Ray Jardine 47
Warren Harding 40
Kevin Worrall 40
Royal Robbins 38
Frank Sacherer 37
Rick Sylvester 33
Dale Bard 32
Bob Kamps 31
Mark Chapman 31
Rick Cashner 30
Mark Klemens 29
Don Reid 28
Yvon Chouinard 26
Ron Kauk 26
Mark Powell 25
Steve Roper 25
George Meyers 25
John Long 24
Kim Schmitz 22
Charlie Porter 22
Wally Reed 21
Tom Frost 21
Chris Fredericks 21
Ken Boche 20
Glen Denny 19
Barry Bates 19
Bill Price 19
Jim Donini 18
TM Herbert 17
Chris Cantwell 16
Galen Rowell 15
Jerry Anderson 15
Steve Wunsch 15
John Lakey 15
Bruce Morris 14
Les Wilson 13
Rik Rieder 13
Ed Barry 13
Jim Beyer 13
Layton Kor 12
John Bragg 12
John Bachar 12
Eric Beck 11
Chris Falkenstein 11
Bruce Pollock 11
Al MacDonald 10
G.B. Harr 10
Joe Faint 10
Matt Donohoe 10
Mike Breidenbach 10
Vern Cleavenger 10
Dick Long 9
Tom Higgins 9
Loyd Price 9
Roger Breedlove 9
Jim Pettigrew 9
Werner Braun 9
Dick McCracken 8
Wolfgang Heinritz 8
Greg Schaffer 8
Bob Ashworth 8
Bruce Hawkins 8
Peter Haan 8
George Sessions 7
Herb Swedlund 7
Gary Colliver 7
Gordon Webster 7
Tom Fender 7
Tom Gerughty 7
Jerry Coe 7
Bruce Price 7
Rab Carrington 7
Richard Harrison 7
Bob Sullivan 7
George Whitmore 6
Jim Wilson 6
Merle Alley 6
Bill Feuerer 6
Krehe Ritter 6
Rich Calderwood 6
Dave McFadden 6
Joe McKeown 6
Andrzej Ehernfeucht 6
Dave Trantor 6
Dave Bircheff 6
Don Peterson 6
Pete Livesey 6
Henry Barber 6
Tobin Sorenson 6
John Yablonski 6
Tony Dailley 6
Dave Anderson 6
Dave Altman 6
Angie Morales 6
Don Goodrich 5
Jim Baldwin 5
Andy Lichtman 5
Rob Foster 5
Tim Fitzgerald 5
Jim Madsen 5
Bev Johnson 5
Peter Barton 5
Mark Moore 5
Linda McGinnis 5
Hugh Burton 5
Dennis Oakeshott 5
Rick Accomazzo 5
Larry Zulim 5
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Dec 16, 2009 - 02:54pm PT
forgot to mention that taken as a prediction, we are on the "yellow" curve rather than on the "purple" curve (is it purple?), that is, we are on track to top out not because humans can't, but because the humans that could aren't climbing... (and may not yet exist).

For Jim Bridwell in Yosemite, you have to consider Tuolumne Meadows separately, as the database does not include TM climbs... now that there is a new TM Guide by CF, with the FA history, it would be possible to include those in the spread sheet.

Perhaps a new winter project...
Messages 1 - 20 of total 24 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

Try a free sample topo!

SuperTopo Videos

Recent Route Beta