Dawn Wall

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 1 - 20 of total 61 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
donald perry

Trad climber
kearny, NJ
Topic Author's Original Post - Feb 16, 2019 - 07:12pm PT
I am trying to get a handle on the style. It looks like Kevin did it without any hangdoging while Tommy seems to have practiced moves on tension.
donald perry

Trad climber
kearny, NJ
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 17, 2019 - 09:27pm PT
Yea, I can see from the movie now.

The Dawn Wall is a completely new kind of climbing:

It is so big that it’s a climb where what it is all about is finding it. Its hiding up there somewhere, and you have to look everywhere on aid to find the line. It is not like climbing the Nose, where it’s fairly well straightforward following a corner and a crack. Here "Where is it?" is always the question. To just climb to find the route would be the same as to say you must find your way back in a fog if you were lost at sea. Should you row as hard as you can now? No, you first need to see.

The next problem has to do to with finding the holds. The climb is so elusive that you need a magnifying glass and tick marks to see where you are going to go before you even set foot to leave the ledge. No one has the eyes to do this kind of free climbing without aid. If you did just climb the climb you would not be able to understand either what you are doing or what you just did, there would be no understanding anything.

This means that for this climb it's so different that now style must needs be sacrificed if there is going to even be a climb. While hangdogging is counterproductive in finding "The Climb" on other cliffs, here aid is the foundation of good climbing, and the first ascent party has to make this sacrifice to bring the light to it.

So, what made for good or bad style before makes for the complete opposite kind of good and bad style here only on the Dawn Wall. A completely new understanding of necessary reversed ethics and style can clearly be defined and has come to light!
ionlyski

Trad climber
Polebridge, Montana
Feb 18, 2019 - 07:53am PT
You clearly don't get it. You make it sound like you could climb in other directions or make other moves (go around) if you were not able to find the line. The line is the easiest path, the one with weakness. Except in this case it's what, 5.14d?

I wouldn't waste too much time trying to figure out this "new" style of climbing Mr. Perry. It might not quite suit you. I know I won't be:)

Arne
WBraun

climber
Feb 18, 2019 - 08:11am PT
Dawn wall free is a 2300 foot boulder problem/sport climb that took years to do.

Kauk said in the 80's that in future people will attempt this type of climbing.

Most people don't want to spend years on this type of endeavor to a route of this size.

It's a rarity .....

donald perry

Trad climber
kearny, NJ
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 18, 2019 - 08:25am PT
Ionlyski you wrote: "You clearly don't get it. You make it sound like you could climb in other directions or make other moves if you were not able to find the line. The line is the easiest path, the one with weakness. Except in this case it's what, 5.14d? I wouldn't waste too much time trying to figure out this "new" style of climbing there Senior Mr. Perry. It might not quite suit you. Arne"

Arne, You can climb in other directions or make other moves. I am talking about the style of the first ascent party. What did you suppose my post was about?, you and me going at it for the third ascent outside the Topo?
mouse from merced

Trad climber
The finger of fate, my friends, is fickle.
Feb 18, 2019 - 08:37am PT
now style must needs be scarified must be a typo, but if it's not...

go up there with a surgeon who has some experience is my advice
if you insist on making incisions in the Dawn Wall

do you have good medical insurance or know some climbing quack?
donald perry

Trad climber
kearny, NJ
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 18, 2019 - 08:44am PT
opps, thanks
donald perry

Trad climber
kearny, NJ
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 18, 2019 - 01:39pm PT
The point of the argument is what has to do with style. Lets say John Doe has a limit of 5.12c. Now, if John said he had free climbed the Dawn Wall as a first ascent, yet rested between each bolt placement in doing so and completed the climb, John might call this a free climb but no one else would. To take a step back, if John did the same thing in good style after practicing every move on aid, people loyal to the ground up ethic would say that what he did has nothing to do with free climbing either. He would be breaking the trivial yet logical rules of what should make for a logical free ground up second ascent for the next party. Climbs are supposed to be done in the style of the first ascent party or better. But in this case ground up style has lost its place.

The more "trivial" points of the Dawn Wall style are:
1. Checking out the climb on top rope.
2. Hangdogging: practicing moves on tension or mid-pitch.
3. Cleaning the holds.
4. Chalking the holds.
5. Marking the holds you find with a magnifying glass.
6. Photographing the holds and studying them from your home.
7. Measuring the holds.
8. Rapping off to the crux from the top of the cliff.
9. Taking handouts.
10. Using fixed gear.
11. Using third parties with specialized lighting equipment (in this instance professional photographers) providing artificial illumination to holds that heretofore were not visible to the unaided naked eye. Without this special illumination these holds were not fully usable because without this kind of lighting they could not be seen as clearly.

All these make for a work that the second ascent party cannot repeat using traditional ground up ethics, and what has been considered good style.

There are a set of rules everyone more or less should agree to, to which the author that writes the guide book considers when you tell him you have done a new free climb you want to enter into the local guide for others to repeat. You can not just make things up, you actually have to do something, and that something is a specific something.

My point is that on the Dawn Wall no one can argue about these kinds of trivial ethics and style, because without bad-style there would never be any style in the first place. And in fact, now unquestionably a portion of the style scale has now been demonstrated to be reversed for the first time, that good style is bad style and bad style is good style. I am talking about the trivial points, not the whole style scale, the latter of which would include:

1. Chipping holds.
2. Freeing the climb under tension.
3. Breaking up the pitches into short sections.
4. Adding protection in places which will allow the drag of the rope to give you an advantage.
5. Adding glue to loose rock to keep it in place.

I am only talking about the upper margin of the style scale, that part that has always been less obvious which has now be defined.


ionlyski

Trad climber
Polebridge, Montana
Feb 18, 2019 - 01:44pm PT
So Tommy used bad style?
donald perry

Trad climber
kearny, NJ
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 18, 2019 - 05:06pm PT
Jeremy Ross, I tried to clarify my post. Let me know if you think it makes sense. Thanks.
Don Paul

Social climber
Washington DC
Feb 18, 2019 - 05:25pm PT
I have to agree with Donald. These are not advances in rock climbing.
Roger Breedlove

climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
Feb 18, 2019 - 05:35pm PT
Donald Perry, I've watched free climbing style evolve for a long time. Since sometime in the 1970's the hardest free climbing has had some sort of previewing to work out the moves. Before that the rule was closer to climbing continuously, without previewing or practicing. Tommy and Kevin worked out all but the hardest moves and then climbed from the bottom to the top in something like 17,000 years. I think all El Cap free routes have been in the same style. I wouldn't question the style at all. All hard things require lots of practice. Many years ago I ended an article that had duscussed yo yoing, about which Roper said, "It sounds like a job!", by pointing out that in the future it would be a fun romp for some young climber. That was in 1973 and the climbing was hard 5.10.
Mungeclimber

Trad climber
Nothing creative to say
Feb 18, 2019 - 05:44pm PT
looks like the thread had a bunch of posts nuked?

Not a big deal, but talking climbing is fun... so here ya go...
On your bad style scale...
Freeing the climb under tension.
isn't 'freeing' so it isn't really a good example of 'freeing'. :)






Gnome Ofthe Diabase

climber
Out Of Bed
Feb 18, 2019 - 05:49pm PT
I'm aware of climbs that take the plumb line where others have found ways to by-pass some of the hardest bits of the line, when that climb-able, but the un-protectable line has been pushed & as an increase, & a climb in its own right; a significant increase in standards, so seemingly important to record as a worthy achievement...
there has been push-back from many others, often the majority.
Change, when it takes vision, & so visionaries to understand it, credit is often bestowed by popularity, lack of abrasiveness of the visionary...
not fair, but climbing recognition as life is not fair.


getting the popcorn, I have a clue where this might be going....
you be true Donald. I know you'll be yourself.....
tradmanclimbs

Ice climber
Pomfert VT
Feb 18, 2019 - 06:10pm PT
Donald. every single hard boulder problem and sport climb is done this way. its called projecting. Dawn wall was just a really, really big project... they worked very hard and were successful. End of story....
shipoopoi

Big Wall climber
oakland
Feb 18, 2019 - 06:55pm PT
so, this donald perry guy is from new jersey? am i the first to say troller? anybody know this avator? shipoopoi
Oldfattradguy2

Trad climber
Here and there
Feb 18, 2019 - 07:12pm PT
Were any fixed pitons “borrowed” from nearby classic moderate routes? 😳
nah000

climber
now/here
Feb 18, 2019 - 07:36pm PT
donald perry wrote: “And in fact, now unquestionably a portion of the style scale has now been demonstrated to be reversed for the first time...”

hmmm... ‘fraid preuss would like a word... ‘cause style has continuously gone down hill for the last 150 yrs if one uses the same logic as the lengthy post that was made...

ie. if the op is a troll then keep on keepin’ on... and if not s/he should read a little climbing history.

or at least throw an “if you don’t place your own draws during the free ascent it’s a pink point” line of argumentation into the mix...

maybe then you’d have a better chance of getting more agreement around these parts...
donald perry

Trad climber
kearny, NJ
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 18, 2019 - 08:41pm PT
From Shipoopoi Feb 18, 2019 - 06:55pm PT
"so, this donald perry guy is from new jersey? am i the first to say troller? anybody know this avator? shipoopoi"

Okay, I guess I will just have to keep going then until you can figure it out.

What should or should not be considered a legitimate ascent is a question I had often struggled with in my early years of rock climbing. During this time, I went through various techniques to try to answer this question. At one point I made it my goal to accomplish climbs with no falls following the example of Jim Erickson, and to insure this I did a lot of down climbing. But I found this became very impractical and tiresome for my belayers.

When I started climbing back in the 70's and 80's the climbing scene was way different than it is today. It was very political back then. Everyone knew each other (or knew someone who knew who you were), everyone was familiar with what you were doing. The Gunks were an exciting place to be while everyone was trying to put up new routes. The people that were making the most of this naturally did not naturally appreciate the competition, for fear that either they would lose a route, or that the potential for the better future routes would disappear. Some people would even steel other people’s projects, the atmosphere had a lot of drama, tension and adrenalin. While the last aid climbs were being freed, as it came about, there developed two separate groups within the Gunks climbing community.

Among the leading influential climbers of the era were John Brag, Mark Robinson, Russ Raffa, Rich Romano, John Standard, Richard Goldstone, Kevin Bein as well as others. Among the majority, there were ethics and morals set in stone. There had to be approval for your having freed an aid route or free route for it to be considered legitimate. And when people did not meet the standard their work was not recorded in Dick Williams Guide.

Henry Barber also had initial political influence in the Gunks, but after 1978 people lost interest in anything Barber had to say or do. Barber had abandoned his climbing partner Rob Taylor on Mt Kilimanjaro, and people hated him for that.

For new comers to the Gunks, climbing in sloppy style was spit upon, mocked, and those people who continued to engage in such, who were unteachable, they were ostracized. For example, Bill Ravitch (the Gunks climbing bum, historian, and expert) believed that if you could not climb a 5.9 on top-rope you had no business trying to climb 5.8 on lead. What was paramount was that a climb should be done in good style and without weighting the rope to check out the climb. Using the rope to hold your weight was considered aid if you were hanging around. Climbing was a sport for the old, and not for the young, and if you had not been climbing over five years it was understood that you had a lot to learn. But if you had the experience, falling was considered reasonable. You learned to respect the standards, and if you did fall where you went next was back to the ground or the ledge and never under any circumstances back on the crux.

It was not until Max Jones and Mark Hudon came to the Gunk’s around 1979 climbing Between The Lines with Mark Robinson and Kevin Bein that the Gunks ethics came into question. They explained that their hang-dogging was necessary to do the new standard, and the really hard climbing. That it was through this ethic they created the Phoenix 5.13a which was accomplished breaking through new free climbing barriers in Yosemite. No one from the Gunk’s gave them much of an argument after they explained themselves, that they had to work through each section separately one section at a time, and thereafter piece them all together. They said that otherwise, it would never work. Mark Robinson mockingly referred to this kind of climbing as Phoenix Style, and so it was that it did not catch on at the Gunks during this time.

Another group of climbers eventually disregarded this exclusive and powerful governing body within the climbing community and went with a process of rethinking the ethics to one degree or another. They came to reject the idea of having their routes recorded in any guide book considering it a higher standard not to have a place in the climbing guide, to leave no trace, and climb for a greater purpose of leaving things in their original state. Such as what was already the case in Lost City or Bonticou. This group was sensitive of the evil of the ego driven worldview full of competition, and jealously. They sought to eliminate it this kind of thinking and the struggles within to see climbing as what it should be, just you and the rock and nothing more.

The conclusion was that climbs were recorded anyway, and inspections, hang-dogging, and aid was considered unnecessary and undesirable. Rich Romano was a key influence in bringing these concepts to bear, in what should be the accepted style, or what was and what was not “climbing”.

Through my own journey in these ethics I have come to the same conclusions, that aid (upward aid or starting past the ledge from hanging on the rope) is unnecessary as well as a demonstration of the lack of patients and vision.

As had been demonstrated through the years, how many times you lower down off a climb is not most important, rather having solid gear is what makes for the best style. If your gear is falling out while you are leading people will think you are an idiot. No one should think they need to unnecessary risk their life for style, doing what could be a safe climb----to flash through in such a manner actually demonstrates the height of foolishness and bad style. For example, this kind of thinking would prove Alex Honnold to be climbing in poor style because there is plenty of gear around in much of what he solos. Climbing is actually physically harder and more time consuming with a rope and a rack then having a route memorized on solo. To not fall leading is a greater accomplishment not because of what is at stake, but because the climb is more physically demanding to make it a responsible accomplishment.

Who or what is not tied in will eventually fall off sooner or later, put other people’s lives at risk, and guarantee failure in the long run. But it makes for good movies, and newbies love it … does that make it smart? Most people who have been climbing a long time don’t see the advantage of putting your life at risk, that the climb should now become the greatest form of idolatry. The 10 commandments actually have nothing to do with rocks.

Other points in the argument are that good style necessitates pulling the rope through. However, pulling the rope through before a second attempt does not prove anything, because real climbing has nothing to do with a rope. Perfect style is not to fall in the first place, to never climb into what you cannot finish without falling. Nevertheless, you will fall when you push your limits. So therefore, this no fall style is just as unreasonable as feeling you need to pull the rope through to make it a legitimate lead.

Another point to come to grips with is that a top-rope also makes for a first ascent. Ironically, a top-rope should make for a first ascent because a party of two that take turns leading a route are both considered as having made a first ascent. It has always been that way. Typically, when you have spent enough time climbing the fear factor or where the rope is, is not what makes for the real problem in the ascent, rather it is getting through the physical work to make the climb. That’s, provided the rating is between G and R.

Leading or top roping both use the add of the rope, you cannot argue that the security of the rope is out of the picture in either case. And therefore, it is now obvious that all those bolts in New River Gorge (for example) do not make for a better style of climbing. I would say it is the opposite, that they create a work of fiction, there is nothing natural about bolts. This would actually be climbing in bad style. The need for bolts on short cliffs is no more essential chipping holds.

In conclusion it has been demonstrated that using aid for upward progress is unnecessary, nevertheless at the same time I would agree there can be exceptions to the rule. In cases such as this it would be better to initially make the first ascent on aid, to then thereafter free the climb.

Now I wrote all that before I watched the Dawn Wall movie. Thereafter I had to work on expanding the last paragraph.
donald perry

Trad climber
kearny, NJ
Topic Author's Reply - Feb 18, 2019 - 08:46pm PT
"Were any fixed pitons “borrowed” from nearby classic moderate routes? 😳"

yeeesh, lets not ask that question.
Messages 1 - 20 of total 61 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
 
Our Guidebooks
spacerCheck 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

guidebook icon
Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta