Climb Ratings- Birth of NCCS Leigh Ortenberger Summit 1963

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 1 - 45 of total 45 in this topic

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Original Post - Dec 19, 2009 - 04:32pm PT

For those folks that are curious about the origins of climbing ratings and grades, Leigh Ortenberger first proposed such a National Climbing Classification System in Summit magazine May/June 1963. Tahquitz was a very influential area in establishing a comparative rating system that oddly became the Yosemite Decimal system or YDS. Many other areas developed grading systems in relative isolation with all the historical idiosyncrasies one would expect.

This is the first attempt that I am aware of to establish comparative ratings on a national scale. The initial article had some typos in the tables so what is posted here are the corrected ones to help avoid confusion.

jogill

climber

Colorado

Dec 19, 2009 - 09:45pm PT

Interesting effort, but the YDS was well on its way by then. The NCCS was technically in use in the Tetons, but when climbers talked of a route, they usually used the YDS. Going from 5.9 to something called "5.10" was a minor intellectual faux pas, but few paid any attention, and the designation made perfect sense in the context.

Eric Beck

Sport climber

Bishop, California

Dec 19, 2009 - 10:28pm PT

Back when the first Yosemite guide was under construction, I remember Roper receiving a letter from Ortenberger imploring him to adopt the F system. That whatever was used in the Yosemite guide would become the national standard.

JuanDeFuca

Big Wall climber

Peenemunde

Dec 19, 2009 - 10:34pm PT

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F67JhKT5bxU&feature=related

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Dec 20, 2009 - 04:51pm PT

So, it sounds like Ortenberger's efforts were mostly a case of regional (Teton) pride attempting to assert itself on a national scale. Do you recall if he had any other sources of support from the AAC or what was left of the Sierra Club rock climbing sections? Did the F system have any advantage to offer other than its wide use in alpine areas and a few places like J-tree and Devil's Lake?

I bet Roper would have embraced the NCCS if it had been the F-ing scale rather than just the F scale! LOL

Chiloe

Trad climber

Lee, NH

Dec 20, 2009 - 04:57pm PT

Have we had a post about the alternative rating system that Harvey Carter developed,
and promoted in some early issues of Climbing? I don't recall anything about it except
that it came and went.

Mighty Hiker

climber

Vancouver, B.C.

Dec 20, 2009 - 05:06pm PT

Proponents of a national or even an international reating system sometimes seem out of touch with the mainstream of local climbing philosophies. Idealistically, an international system is as desirable as Esperanto, a fine, doomed idea.

Steve Roper, Climber's Guide to Yosemite Valley, 1970

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Dec 20, 2009 - 08:58pm PT

Classic Roper! Too funny, Anders!

Fritz

Trad climber

Hagerman, ID

Dec 20, 2009 - 09:29pm PT

Steve: Fascinating topic. After looking at the list of "big climbing names" that Ortenberer asserts have endorsed the NCCS: I'm amazed that it did not gain wider acceptance.

Maybe Roper "took it down."

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Dec 20, 2009 - 10:43pm PT

The best technology doesn't always win. Just look at MS Windows for perhaps the most glaring example.

The NCCS system was identical to the decimal system from 5.7 on up (F7 on up) and compressed some of the lower grades that no one can tell apart anyway. From a purely logical perspective, it made much more sense. I think A1 - A5 was also an NCCS innovation, but maybe those grades had already come into use and Ortenburger just adopted them.

But the really useful feature of the NCCS system had nothing to do with the format of the numbers. It was an attempt to create grade-defining example routes on a national scale, so that 5.10 or F10 would actually mean the same thing in, say, the Tetons, which had about the softest grading in the country, to, say, Devil's Lake Wisconsin, which had about the severest.

Perhaps that effort was doomed by the fact that climbing and climbers were far more regional then. With much less traveling, climbers identified far more with their home turf and perhaps were unwilling to make any modifications to the local standards as part of an alignment effort. They also saw little or no need for national standards since they had no need for grades outside the neighborhood, so to speak.

Or perhaps it was just too hard. In spite of the obvious need for examples to define the meaning of grades, most guidebooks I've seen have not managed to compile such a list for their own little restricted locale, even as the authors add no end of other details, diagrams replete with all kinds of symbols, color photos with detailed topos superimposed, stars for quality, protection ratings, etc. But nothing defining the difficulty ratings for the area, presumably because everyone "knows" what, say, 5.10 means---Ha! precisely what everyone doesn't know, as it turns out.

So I think that Ortenburger's task was made Quixotic by entrenched provincialism. Too bad for all of us, ultimately, we got a Windows grading system.

Clint Cummins

Trad climber

SF Bay area, CA

Dec 21, 2009 - 12:32am PT

> Do you recall if he had any other sources of support from the AAC or what was left of the Sierra Club rock climbing sections?

For some years people reported grades in the AAJ with the F ratings, even for Yosemite.
Maybe what was missing from the NCCS was the F prefix, which is how people actually used it. If people just said Class 1 to 10, it would get confused with the old Class 1 to 6 system.
Overall, it didn't add anything new, except the compression of the lower 5th class grades (which few probably cared about), and the comparison table of the different areas.
And it subtracted the pride people had in saying "Five-nine" and "Five-ten".
Only the Australians were smart enough to use something like it!

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jan 14, 2010 - 11:17am PT

The arrogant, the innocent and the insecure...Bump

Alan Rubin

climber

Amherst,MA.

Jan 14, 2010 - 11:50am PT

I know that Fritz Weissner was involved with the creation of the NCCS and a big proponent. For several years it seemed like a toss-up between the NCCs and YDS as to which would become the national norm (if either), with various guidebooks (and the mid-'60s was the time period when rock climbing guidebooks began to proliferate)using one or the other or both. This period lasted into the early '70s, at which time, as noted by an earlier poster, Harvey T. Carter tried to introduce yet another, incredibly complex, grading system(I think he called it the Universal Grading System or something similar) through Climbing Magazine which he published. This last system was still-born because of it's complexity, and by the mid-'70s the YDS had been accepted in most areas(Devil's Lake with it's own twist on the NCCS was an exception). It was at around this time that "seriousness" ratings were added to the YDS, I believe initially by Jim Erickson in his Boulder guidebbok Rocky Heights.

Alan Rubin

climber

Amherst,MA.

Jan 14, 2010 - 12:36pm PT

Believe it or not, rereading this article brings me a sense of nostalgia, as it was one of the earliest climbing articles that I ever read--quite possibly in the first issue of Summit I obtained at the dawn of my climbing career. Here I was still learning the basics of what one did with the rope (7/16th Goldline), reading this article and trying to figure out what the heck this grading thing was all about!!!!Once I deciphered it a bit and realized that it contained a list of "famous" climbs across the country,I began to dream of climbing all the listed routes--even though I really didn't have any idea of what that really entailed--I guess my first "ticklist". Looking back on it I'm pleased to see that I've managed to tick a fair number of the listed climbs--and there is, hopefully, still time for the remainder!!!!

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jan 14, 2010 - 11:18pm PT

Al- Do you recall anything else about Harvey's Universal Grading System? Was it related to the continental european alpine grading system or something altogether new?

hhhhhhhhh

climber

Jan 14, 2010 - 11:48pm PT

I remember John Wolfe's early Joshua Tree guide book used the NCCS.

Alan Rubin

climber

Amherst,MA.

Jan 15, 2010 - 09:35am PT

Steve, Carter's grading system was indeed something totally "unique". If I remember correctly it contained several "characters"--either numbers or letters or, I think, some of each, for each climb in an effort to quantify (overquantify)the varying elements that make up difficulty. While in theory it may have made sense, in practice it was way too complicated to understand--I recall that there were 4 or 5 or more "characters" to make up each grade. He too had a list of comparative climbs to explain his system, but often quite apparantly similar routes would have very different grades for reasons that I, for one, could never decipher. I'm sure that someone on this forum will have the early issues of Climbing that attempt to explain and utilize his system, and also the ability to scan them onto here.
Thinking back to Ortenberger's article and the NCCS, it was obviously quite a task to compile that comparative list as during that time period there were far fewer climbers and there tended to be less travel and communication between climbers from different parts of the country than became commonplace within a few years after the article appeared.So there were very few, if any, climbers who had the basis of experience in many of the different areas to make the actual comparisons.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jan 15, 2010 - 10:01am PT

Unfortunately, I don't have the earliest issues of Climbing in my collection otherwise you'd be reading Harvey's fantasy already! Perhaps he just wanted something to talk about at parties...LOL

The crux of Consensus is a no-hands leg press on a slippery sloper just off the ground!!! Not sure it has been repeated yet since the webbing at the single anchor is sun bleached bone white!

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 12, 2010 - 11:31am PT

Another article on ratings that appeared just before the OP in the March 1963 issue of Summit.

I recently saw an issue of the AAJ from around this time that featured a Tetons aid pitch reported as a 6.8! It is rather hard to put yourself in the midst of this process from where we all sit now but the details all had to be worked out since the European rating system just never caught on to copy directly.

Mighty Hiker

climber

Vancouver, B.C.

Jun 12, 2010 - 12:33pm PT

The first Squamish guide, written by Jim Baldwin in 1962, graded aid climbs from 6.0 to 6.9. Following the TDS. Perhaps Hamie or Tricouni can say more.

donini

Trad climber

Ouray, Colorado

Jun 12, 2010 - 02:37pm PT

Ortenberger was a great guy but very conservative and slightly behind the times even in the late 60's when I met him. Damn good thing Roper didn't adopt the F system. Steve you must be sitting out the rain like I am.

Wayno

Big Wall climber

Seattle, WA

Jun 12, 2010 - 03:02pm PT

No rain here. Steve must have a honey-do list going.

So how do we adjust for egos in FA ratings? I think Donini has some good ideas about this.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 12, 2010 - 03:17pm PT

The best solution is to go back and repeat your FA's so you get a clear idea of difficulty. When you are worried about what's ahead then climbing becomes more a matter of immediate doability, black and white success.

We had a bad problem with underrating climbs in Arizona with most routes off by a full YDS number grade. My experience climbing elsewhere made it obvious that all it was accomplishing was bumming out visiting climbers so I began to rate my own routes soft to try to even out the grades. I certainly took some abuse for it automatically but my intention wasn't to inflate anything, quite the reverse.

ydpl8s

Trad climber

Santa Monica, California

Jun 12, 2010 - 03:29pm PT

From what I've seen, everybody is so proud of their own home turf that they all think that "their" area is sandbagged compared to all others. I think this is perpetuated when people come to a new area and are not familiar with the technique that is best used for the unique rock in that particular area. Their initial failings, until they get used to the area, only reinforce the locals pride in his home crag.

Of course, then some smartass rockmaster comes along and makes them all look like they're over inflating.

SteveW

Trad climber

The state of confusion

Jun 12, 2010 - 05:18pm PT

I was lucky enough to meet Ortenberger on the Grand in 1974.
Too bad he perished in the Oakland fire. . .

Peter Haan

Trad climber

San Francisco, CA

Jun 12, 2010 - 08:15pm PT

Thanks StevieW. I was gonna say.

Imagine, all those years, decades truly, Leigh on high peaks and walls, and he would perish in an urban firestorm, albeit one that killed 25, consumed 3354 homes, 437 apartments and condos, ate up 1520 acres and $1.5 billion in dollars. How ironic and meaningless.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 27, 2010 - 02:44pm PT

A nice shot of Leigh from an article on Andean climbing in Summit June/July 1978.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Dec 5, 2010 - 01:04pm PT

For all the arcane-0-philes out there in ST land! This is Harvey Carter's version of a rating system as it appeared in Summit magazine September/ October 1957. This may be the earliest attempt to formally define ratings albeit a rather far out one!

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Dec 25, 2010 - 02:35pm PT

Harvey T. Carter Bump!

jogill

climber

Colorado

Dec 25, 2010 - 08:32pm PT

Anyone hear anything about Harvey T. ? Back in the early 1960s he conducted some sort of national bouldering contest in Colorado Springs.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Dec 25, 2010 - 09:18pm PT

You might contact crunch (Steve Bartlett) or groundup if you are looking for an update on Harvey.

hamie

Social climber

Thekoots

Jan 5, 2011 - 10:14pm PT

Bump!

I have recently read Fall Failing, vol 2 of Royal Robbins' bio. On page 102, referring to the 'Mugelnoos',the monthly newsletter of the Rock Climbing Section of the Sierra Club, he says:

"In the August 1953 issue, a new method of classifying climbs was introduced by that month's editor, Chuck Wilts. This method was called the Decimal System. It had been developed after long discussions between Wilts, Don Wilson and me [RR]."

On page 105 there is a chart entitled, 'The Known Routes on Tahquitz Rock', listing 34 routes. The easiest climbs shown are Friction Route 1 and 11. These are rated at 2.7 and 2.8!! Pretty scarey stuff!! Red Rock Route is 4.5, and Tree Route is 4.8

It would appear that the Sierra-Wilts system, forerunner of the YDS might well have been called the Sierra-Wilts-Wilson-Robbins System. YDS sounds better to me.

H.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jan 5, 2011 - 10:26pm PT

The idea was on a lot of people's minds with good reason. A nice range instead of a lot of local greater and lesser thans. The roots of it all are fascinating.

When DR and I interviewed Glen Dawson, he had an extensive collection of notebooks from various portions of his rich and wonderful life. He had the mythical first guidebook to Tahquitz in the appropriate binder, one of four copies! It gives an interesting glimpse into the earliest days there.

Fourth class-length, now there's some nomenclature!

The Trough was Tom Frost's RCS checkout climb in 1959 at 5.0. It rates third class-length here. LOL

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jan 15, 2011 - 05:59pm PT

A 1962 letter from Jim Baldwin (posted by Hamie) while he was working on the Dihedral Wall makes mention of the sixth grade in use as applied to aid climbing.

"Still very bad nailing, continuous 6.7 and 6.8 sometimes 6.9."

Mighty Hiker

climber

Vancouver, B.C.

Jan 15, 2011 - 06:04pm PT

A page from "A Climber's Guide to the Squamish Chief Area", written by Jim Baldwin in 1962. Note use of the 6.0 - 6.9 grading system for aid.
One thing that is amusing is that so many modern guidebooks waste space on discussion and comparison of grading systems.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jan 15, 2011 - 06:17pm PT

Very nice cross reference sheet Anders!

Seems a bit bottom heavy!

Mighty Hiker

climber

Vancouver, B.C.

Jan 15, 2011 - 07:17pm PT

For the first while, Squamish climbers didn't have much experience at other areas, and so didn't really understand the grading system. So many of the free ratings in Jim's book, and indeed in Glenn's guidebook from 1967, are 2 - 3 decimal points below what they should be.

The pendulum has now swung, perhaps too far in the other direction, so that Diedre, orignally graded 5.4, is now allegedly 5.8.

Jingy

climber

Somewhere out there

Jan 15, 2011 - 11:17pm PT

bump for climbing

hamie

Social climber

Thekoots

Jan 16, 2011 - 02:17am PT

#18--ARTIFICIAL LAND--6.4
The truth will out!!!!!
H.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Jan 16, 2011 - 12:23pm PT

We expectorate the truth...LOL

What gives in Artificial Land???

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Mar 27, 2011 - 05:04pm PT

Systematic Bump...

donini

Trad climber

Ouray, Colorado

Mar 27, 2011 - 05:22pm PT

The one comment I'll make about ratings is that they should be flexible and subject to revision by consensus after the climb has seen a number of ascents. Keeping a rating, that is clearly wrong, becuase of the ego or ignorance of the first ascentionists makes no sense.

Steve Grossman

Trad climber

Seattle, WA

Topic Author's Reply - Mar 27, 2011 - 05:51pm PT

We had plenty of comparatively underrated routes around Tucson simply because we collectively hadn't spent enough time climbing in the land of the YDS. Most of our routes were off by a solid number grade and it really bruised lots of egos among visiting climbers. It took a long time to even it out.