Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2006 - 11:47pm PT
|
Ah but I don't agree.
You keep using the fact that hammers were once used as a justification to continue their use once PROVED to be no longer needed.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 12:00am PT
|
and climbers will do whatever they want only as long as land managers allow them to.
After climbing is outlawed guess who's gonna be the only ones still climbing.
Eeee hah! back to the good ol' days when climbers were mostly men and sheep ran for their lives.
|
|
Hummerchine
Trad climber
East Wenatchee, WA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 12:02am PT
|
Of course we don't agree. But here's another analogy for you: If if has been PROVEN that a rope is no longer needed on a route because someone has free-soled it, does that mean that noone can justify using a rope on that route ever again? Heh.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 12:43am PT
|
So Piton and Steve
So truth is relative. It is only a matter of opinion. What is true for you is true you and what is true for me is true for me.
Thus truth is subjective. My opinion is true by virtue of it's being my opinion.
I will pound piton in rock when needed!
|
|
Hummerchine
Trad climber
East Wenatchee, WA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 12:48am PT
|
I bow down to the mighty wisdom of Werner Braun. Brilliant wording, hope to meet you some day!
|
|
dmalloy
Trad climber
eastside
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 12:49am PT
|
"Thus truth is subjective. My opinion is true by virtue of it's being my opinion. "
Cripes, I think Werner just went all Chongo-Face-of-the-Observer on us.
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 01:03am PT
|
Werner, are you trying to outwit Wittgenstein again? Why do I get the feeling that you're chuckling at all of us? Please don't get mad at me but I feel compelled to express my truth and opinions on this. heh-heh
No, Humjob, this isn't fun. You are one pigheaded fool. You remind me so much of the WOS boys. Is there something in the water over there on the East side? You obviously haven't absorbed any of the counter arguments to your position as posted on this and other related threads. You're just beating your chest with your pinkies over your self-proclaimed right to be destructive.
|
|
Hummerchine
Trad climber
East Wenatchee, WA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 01:29am PT
|
Whoa, there Mimi! Excuse me for having fun, I'll certainly never make that mistake again! Silly me, I even thought climbing was fun...I clearly AM a fool. I'll do my best to strive for gloom and unhappiness in the future. Thank you so much for bringing me to my senses with your harsh and degrading words!
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 06:20am PT
|
Hummerchine,
You have stated a couple of different reasons for using a hammer/pitons on a route which has been done clean. I'll try to address those reasons separately, so we don't get confused. But before I do that, I will agree that sometimes the impact of pins is minimal, and the benefits to safety can sometimes be significant. So can be a judgement call as to whether a climber brings them, and/or uses them (if they are brought). Then it is "impact" vs. "safety" (or "avoiding retreating", or "convenience" if the clean gear is hard to place, or "expense" if there is some specialized gear to acquire which you do not have).
OK, now I'll try to understand the separate reasons in your original post:
---- (1)
"If a route was put up on pins/bolts/whatever that used a hammer, and then gets done and altered enough times that the rock now allows for someone to manage to do the non-fixed moves clean, that means that forever more every climber that ever does the route has to ignore how the first ascent party did the route and also do it clean???"
To answer your question directly: no. But you've stated it in such a way that it is an unrealistic and uninteresting question.
1.A. "every climber"
You explain this later:
"So as soon as someone is as talented and/or brave to manage to pull off a route's non-fixed moves clean, then noone else can climb it unless they have the same talent/risk tolerance?"
Agreed, some climbers might not want to take the same risks that others do. For example, if there is a clean placement that is C3 or something with a fairly high chance of failure, vs. using a piton that is A1, and if the piece fails the person if facing a serioius ledge fall, some people will want to place the pin (ideally to have a fixed pin there). Other climbers will be fine using the C3 placement. If a route is correctly rated and has an accurate topo, this sort of risk can be considered ahead of time, when choosing whether to try this climb, or to try another climb instead. The decision could be fairly easy - if there is a fair amount of C3 on the route, but your talent level is only good for C2, you should skip the route and try an easier one. Of course it may not be so clear; you might not know whether you can do C2 or C3. Or the topo may be old or not show the clean rating.
To make the question more realistic, replace "every climber" with "most climbers".
1.B. "that ever does the route"
You explain this:
"And what happens when things change? (rock breaks or changes, fixed piece pulls, etc.)."
Sure, maybe the clean placement deteriorates and a piton is required again. Although ironically, it can easily be the opposite (especially in sandstone) - repeated nailing can create flaring scars where there were once more usable clean placements. If the rock changes in this way, then we might be back in the case where the topo is not accurate. That's why people check for recent beta, of course.
In the case of a fixed piece disappearing, sometimes replacement is needed, and sometimes not. The "inaccurate topo" story applies again here. Normally, fixed gear on routes is maintained and the topo stays fairly accurate. But it happens. For example, last year on the Nose, I noticed that the fixed (pins) pendulum anchor on p4 was missing, and instead there was a fixed ratty cord going over right to some frayed heads. Yuck. I may go up there and restore that at some point if it hasn't been done already. Also, the old Harding bolts along Pancake Flake have been removed. They are not really needed, so I don't think those will be replaced.
To make the question more realistic, replace "that ever does the route" with "that does the route in its current condition". If people climb with minimal impact, and the fixed gear is properly maintained, the route should not change much.
1.C. "has to"
I think here you mean that (in Yosemite, say) there is no (enforced) law that prevents people from nailing. Well, actually in the 70s, some routes on Swan Slab were officially closed to climbing due to piton scarring. Serenity Crack may have been closed to nailing as well; I'm not sure. And for sandstone in particular, there are places like Canyonlands N.P.(and recently, Arches) where hammering pitons and adding new bolts is definitely illegal. So "has to" actually is correct in some places.
To make the question more realistic, replace "has to" with "should".
So, here's the question restated with my changes:
Most climbers that do the route in its current condition should ignore how the first ascent party did the route and also do it clean?
Now I can say yes (usually). Although there will be some occasional exceptions.
----- (2)
"It is just all so contrived, it's not like we're talking about some pristine crack that has never been hammered here. So what if a crack that has seen much prior hammering has a bit more, just because since the first ascent someone has managed to climb it without hammering?"
You could be right - maybe the damage is already done, and more hammering might not have a very significant further impact. It depends on the hardness of the rock, of course (granite vs. sandstone and variety of granite, sandstone, etc.). Fundamentally, it could be a nonobvious judgement call of "impact" vs. "safety" (or "avoiding retreating", etc.).
The question can be fairly easy to answer if the impact seems significant (soft rock), and if clean gear works as well or better than pitons. When there is a tradeoff, then the answer might not be easy.
----- (3)
"I climbed the Shield for my 40th birthday, nearly ten years ago. It had been climbed "clean" prior to my ascent. I have to put the word "clean" in parenthasis, since the "clean" ascent did use many fixed (non-clean) placements. Did I also do a "clean" ascent? NO. I proudly used whatever I felt necessary, including pitons. As had about a zillion parties before me, and about a zillion thereafter. Does the knowledge that there are some parties that have manaqed to climb the route "clean" detract from my ascent? Not the slightest bit in my mind. Obviously there are those out there that disagree, so be it. Sorry, but the climb ruled, we had a gas, one of the finest experiences of my life. I toast all who have had this fine experience!"
I agree tha the Shield is a good example of a climb which has been done clean with some fixed gear, and which is still often done with a little hammering. It is definitely one of those cases where there is a tradeoff in terms of increased difficulty/risk if you do a clean ascent (conditional on certain fixed gear). And it is a highly sought after route, so people are willing to tolerate some impact, so they can experience such a classic. For reference I did it back in '87, using Ron's "Dorn Direct" start, and we hammered a little. Also, it is fairly hard granite, so it can tolerate hammering better than softer granite or sandstone. I'm willing to trust your judgement on hammering only where you think it was needed. I wouldn't expect you to start hammering at random on it. In the case of the Shield, I would say the "most climbers" principle could be used. That is, if most people are hammering a little, you are at least following the consensus style.
So, while the Shield may be a reasonable exception to the principle of "once clean, always clean", there are many other routes where the principle is still good.
For example, on the Nose, I think virtually nobody takes a hammer and pins (unless they are on some special mission to maintain the fixed gear). And doing it clean does not increase the risk or difficulty by much if at all. The rock hardness is about the same as the Shield, so impact is similar (fairly low).
Moonlight Buttress (C1, in Zion) should be another example of a route that is almost always done clean and should not be nailed. The impact of nailing there is more significant since the rock is softer. It also sees a fair number of free ascents, and piton scars could change the free climbing, so that is another standard reason to avoid such impact.
I'm sure there are some aid routes where the "most climbers" principle is not (yet) usable because about half the ascents have some hammering and half do not. If there are routes like this, probably they will soon be done clean by most climbers, because most people want to minimize impact, and it will appear after several clean ascents that it is not all that risky. I suppose an example might be Crack in the Cosmic Egg (in Zion), where the first pitch has some mandatory 5.9 which can be protected by a piton or two. (If it was in granite, the pitons might be left fixed [I think fixed pins may tend to loosen rapidly or fall out in Zion in some cases?] or nuts might be safe enough). On this route, it may be the case that people who feel they cannot do the 5.9 without placing pins will just avoid that route and do something else. Especially if several people do that pitch without pitons.
So, after this lengthy post, I'll attempt a short conclusion. Keep the "once clean, always clean" principle, and try to use it whenever you can. There will be some exceptions, like the Shield (for many people). The principle is still useful. On climbs which see some clean and some nonclean ascents, it may be wise to bring a hammer, especially if there is a lot of fixed gear to maintain (more true on granite than sandstone, I think). But you should first develop your clean aiding skills on easier routes, and not attempt to learn to hammer on a route that is often done clean. In other words, there will be judgement calls to make; be sure you have the experience to make good choices.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 06:59am PT
|
Hummer,
that bit about the rope just underscores how thick climbers can be. Don't you understand the difference between style and ethics?
If someone does a route without a rope so what? How does that have a direct bearing on anyone else?
But if someone takes a hammer to a route it can affect everyone to follow.
It boggles my mind that climbers are so dense that they simply cannot grasp this distinction.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 01:29pm PT
|
"So truth is relative. It is only a matter of opinion. What is true for you is true you and what is true for me is true for me. Thus truth is subjective. My opinion is true by virtue of it's being my opinion."
Is that really a true statement, or only true for you?
It seemed like you were making a statement about the way that TRUTH works, but on your model, you are precluded from actually doing that. So, what WERE you actually saying?
On your model, what is the distinction between truth and opinion? Can anybody be mistaken about anything?
The rest of the discussion continues to be good, clean fun.
|
|
TradIsGood
Fun-loving climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 01:47pm PT
|
You can't translate this statement into Japanese and preserve its meaning.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 01:53pm PT
|
Ahhh, yes, self reference is so fun.
Of course, the problem noted above is not one of self reference.
|
|
the Fet
climber
A urine, feces, and guano encrusted ledge
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 02:27pm PT
|
If someone nails an alternate placement that doesn't go clean so what (e.g. CT)? How does that have a direct bearing on anyone else?
If someone FAs a slab mainly with hooks and some bolts and rivets boldly spaced so what (WoS)? How does that have a direct bearing on anyone else?
|
|
Hummerchine
Trad climber
East Wenatchee, WA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 05:27pm PT
|
Clint:
Best I can tell, I agree with just about everything you said...including my grammatical corrections. It appears that somehow I came off as a piton-loving destroyer of rock, which is simply not true. I've been an avid rock climber for nearly 30 years, really have not placed that many pitons in my life. Have climbed El Cap 9 times, I think I/we brought pins on four of those ascents. Of the routes where I/we brought pins, I/we used a vast majority of clean placements. I don't even like pitons. Just wanted to clear that up for those who may have misunderstood me, I do not deny that I am not the best writer in the world. The main issue throughout this discussion that I take offense to is the public trashing of someone for placing a pin on a route that has ever been done clean. I still feel that just because someone finally manages to pull of a clean ascent of a route, that does not mean that now everyone has to follow in their footsteps. You seem to agree with this, I like your statement:
"That is, if most people are hammering a little, you are at least following the consensus style."
Clearly by the posts I've seen there are those that violently feel that once a route is done clean, then noone should ever use a hammered placement on that route ever again. And that is their opinion which I repect, minus the verbal shredding some seem necessary to inflict. But hey, I guess if anyone wins this agruement it is the consensus!
Nice post, btw...well thought out and worded.
|
|
TradIsGood
Fun-loving climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 05:50pm PT
|
Actually, madbolter1, it is very much related.
"My opinion is true because it is my opinion", refers to self - the author self. So the statement's truth is context-sensitive.
For example, the statement can be false if the context is you, and true if the context is translated to Werner. Analogously,
my example is true in the original language, but meaningless when translated into another language.
So it is mildly related to the OP. Since it is a question of "ethics" - quoted intentionally - the truth is as indiscernible, since there is no community agreement, and since each climbing event occurs in a different context.
|
|
BoKu
Trad climber
Douglas Flat, CA
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 06:45pm PT
|
> So truth is relative.
Word. Truth is relative, and quality is absolute. The awkward inversion of these principles is what places western thought upon such an unstable foundation. Aristotle and his corrupt cronies oughta been taken out and shot.
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 07:12pm PT
|
When you go to Steve's House Of Smoke you should really try the ribs. Normally I don't eat ribs, but these are really delicious.
They have this homemade hickory sauce and the glaze is just a little crispy.
The chicken and steaks are good, but go for the ribs.
|
|
Euroford
Trad climber
chicago
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 07:19pm PT
|
now thats what i'm talking about!
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 20, 2006 - 07:21pm PT
|
Hehehe
No, that was actually Protagoras, and Mimi knows me to well. Yes, it is a defective logic! I wanted to see what people saw and their reactions to this foolish logic.
Truth is absolute, and not subjective. The relative truth depends on the Absolute Truth, summun bonum. This material world is relative truth.
The Absolute Truth is true for everyone.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!