more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

New Areas. New routes. Retrobolting. Add-ons. Re-grading. etc.
User avatar
tygereye
Posts: 220
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 7:34 am
Real Name: Brenda Marx
Location: Stellenbosch

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by tygereye » Mon Apr 11, 2016 10:46 am

I think holds breaking off is part of the history of a route.
Rock climbing is about what the mountain gives you.
We are already putting bolts on routes that won't take gear.
If it's about climbing (i.e. the movement/exercise) at a certain grade (difficulty/intensity), then we may as well go to a gym where conditions are controlled. In the mountains we have to adapt to the rock (steep/slab/brittle/broken/wet/soapy) as well as the weather and other external conditions, where a 23 can feel like a 28 in certain circumstances.
I still feel that grades should play a larger role in showing us whether we have any business in getting on the route (to experience the moves, the view, the journey), rather than how big our egos should grow after getting to the top of them.

micky
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:03 am
Location: Cape Town

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by micky » Mon Apr 11, 2016 3:56 pm

i'd say a consistent route is a better than a stopper route. Its sport crag too, its has a ton of bolts in it, i dont see the issue of chipping a small hold back in the make the route climbable again. Once its filled with chalk after people have climbed its will be unnoticeable. I understand the lets not go manufacture routes and climb what the rock gives us. But sometimes its worth more to fix one hold to make an entire route climeable again.

Another example is 7 in oudtshoorn. This would have been impossible forever unless those holds on the blank section were made. So now we have a great 29 plus an great 32 extension where without the drilled holes we would have nothing. So dont go make an entire manufactured route, but if adding one hold makes something climbable then why not?

Warren G
Posts: 855
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:48 am
Real Name: Warren Gans

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by Warren G » Mon Apr 11, 2016 5:25 pm

If you have a topic to raise please don't poach a busy forum topic to do so: that sort of like stealing someone's line, which is both ironic and done on each of these "Ebert's Unholy Crusade" threads. Build your own lines, make Forum FAs!!

But back to topic...

While I agree that credit is due to the efforts of the BB and the FA I have several concerns with over stating the BB's efforts, but mainly this story:

Person A (lets call him a popular name like Matti T) gets strong, psyched, climbs some hard stuff, wants to makes a name for himself and buys a drill accordingly. He then reads this story about this Maatch hero person who bolted a route, then 15 years (OMG!) later THE Ondra superman flies over and opens that line, creating the hardest route in the country, and as a side Mr Maatch gets the recognition for bolting the line. Man what a hero Mr Maatch is! "I want to be like my heroes" thinks Matti T, and does about bolting lines wherever he thinks there might possibly be something hard. Don't get me wrong Matti gives the routes a go, but his underlying reason to bolt is for the BB, and if that means he bolts a few impossible lines to get the recognition of bolting the new hardest route for 2025 who cares right?

Well I do. I love rock: I think its the coolest stuff out there and I'd quite like to, um, protect it. Now, the short term "protection" is sticking one's short thin bolt in it and fondling her beautiful curves (and leaving this disgusting white crusty stuff all over her face), and claiming to have gotten her first. But also, don't you think we should be letting the future climbers make their own routes? What happens if there is a revolutionary development in climbing protection or ethos making bolts redundant, but we have scared all our prettiest natural assets with rusty wholes because we (like Matti above) wanted to build our legacy's on the bolts in our bags, and line in our minds, rather than giving them the gifts we take for granted, in the form of unclimbed rock. Personally I think not only should we give the BBer the opportunity to open the line, we should demand the FA from them to ensure that they aren't pock-marking our rock with their smutty egoes. It should be taboo to bolt a line but be incapable of opening it.

Man, I hope you guys get the point I have tried to make above. :drunken:
Sandbagging is a dirty game

micky
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:03 am
Location: Cape Town

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by micky » Mon Apr 11, 2016 5:31 pm

haha i'd like to see you demanding FA's from the best climbers in the world trying to open their projects

PaulB
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:59 pm

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by PaulB » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:15 pm

I know I'm late to this discussion and Ebert's been well and truly chastised but just had the thought: what value is there to a FA if other people aren't allowed to try a route? It's like people want to have their cake and eat it - there is no 'first' if no one else is able to compete.

His real-life-trolling is extreme but Ebert has some valid points to make and I respect the strength it takes to stand up to the status quo.

micky
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:03 am
Location: Cape Town

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by micky » Wed Apr 13, 2016 8:44 pm

maybe it should be called an OA (opening ascent) for sport climbing. For me personally its just about the effort (and money) that goes into putting up a line that deserves some respect from other climbers to allow that person to 'open' it. So yeah there is some ego involved, i want people to know i searched and found the line, and put in the hours to make it what it is. There is a creative process involved, like if you created some piece of art and someone just took it and said it was theirs. Not that you own the rock or created the rock but you found the line and had part in creating it by all thats involved.

The alternative could be something like, you find a great line, go through all the mission of getting access, cleaning, bolting etc etc and then some dude strolls past while you're not there, climbs it and then goes to tell everyone about this great line he opened. Meanwhile he actually had no part in the development. If say we changed the rules and said you cant have closed projects im sure it would seriously damage further development as many people would just not see the effort worth it. You'd basically just be putting in a ton of effort so people stronger than you can boost their egos by claiming your lines.

There is definately something to be said for projects being closed for too long though, but who is to say what the limit is. I'm sure if its been closed for a very long time and you wanted to climb the route, it wouldnt be unreasonable to call up the bolter and ask to climb the line. If he says no, well its not like we're running out of rock on this planet.

As far as i know Ebert hasnt actually stolen anyones projects, he's just stirring the pot.

dannypinkas
Posts: 154
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2006 6:53 pm
Real Name: Danny Pinkas

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by dannypinkas » Thu Apr 14, 2016 1:29 pm

I know I'm late to this discussion and Ebert's been well and truly chastised but just had the thought: what value is there to a FA if other people aren't allowed to try a route? It's like people want to have their cake and eat it - there is no 'first' if no one else is able to compete.

His real-life-trolling is extreme but Ebert has some valid points to make and I respect the strength it takes to stand up to the status quo.
Paul B, I think you have summed the crux of the debate. What Ebert is trying to do is to get everyone to compete to be the first to send a bolted route. Current convention, however, is that by spotting and spending your resources on equipping a route you are already first and should not have to compete with others who would like to leech off your efforts.
Personally, I would like to think that the competitive aspect of climbing should be confined to the gyms while a spirit of camaraderie and respect for others’ efforts prevails outdoors.

User avatar
CragRat
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 10:54 am
Location: Centurion / JHB, South Africa

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by CragRat » Thu Apr 14, 2016 2:37 pm

I know I'm late to this discussion and Ebert's been well and truly chastised but just had the thought: what value is there to a FA if other people aren't allowed to try a route? It's like people want to have their cake and eat it - there is no 'first' if no one else is able to compete.
Well if you want to take this line of thought then you need to take it to its natural conclusion. You need for someone to say "oh look, there is a potential for a line right there" and then there will be a mad rush and a fight to who gets to bolt it first so that anyone can get FA (LOL NOT !). Good luck with that. !!!

PaulB
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:59 pm

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by PaulB » Thu Apr 14, 2016 5:04 pm

I get your point Micky and it really does only apply to Sport I guess, where there is a direct investment of time and money. 'Booking' a trad line seems silly to me.

Regarding the 'mad rush' actually this already happens to an extent. More so because people think hardware = ownership. When new crags are found or access opened, people get in bolts in good lines pretty quick. On a related note, how much hardware = ownership? Chains do not cut it for me.

PaulB
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:59 pm

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by PaulB » Thu Apr 14, 2016 5:21 pm

Oh wait, was the mad rush supposed to be sarcastic? People won't bolt lines if others will get the FA? Wow, that's sad. If that's the only motivation please never speak of prolific bolters as if they are doing a great public service, it's pure selfishness. Anyway, it's just not true. I'm sure a lot of people would still bolt lines. I'd hate to believe that the FA tag is the only reason people bolt

User avatar
XMod
Posts: 913
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Real Name: Greg Hart

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by XMod » Thu Apr 14, 2016 7:32 pm

Paul its certainly not the only reason people bolt. BUT Id say 90% of the time people bolt something they want to climb, it becomes a very expensive and very unrewarding process bolting stuff just so that there will be a route there for people to climb. Ive bolted more lines for the 'greater good' than I have lines for my own challenge and satisfaction, at both ends of the grade spectrum.

This just makes it all more painful when you finally find and equip a line that is at the perfect grade and style for you to train hard over a number of months and hopefully evetually send it, only to have some basturd (scuse my language) come and take the FA away. It robs you of the satisfaction part at the end of it all. Personally it kills my incentive to actually try the thing at all - the whole point of the exercise has been murdered by the insensitive and selfish action of some hot-shot who's too lazy to actually go and make his own projects.

Sure if a project proves to be beyond what you can manage in a year or so, you should make it open - there are/were(?) enough open projects around for the top guys to compete for the FA's - there is zero need for them to go and mess with someone else's creative process by stealing FA's on closed projects. Whats stopping them from going and bolting their own stuff? - thats the main question here.

My theory is that the current generation has been spoilt by the huge number of OP's left to them by our (the first sport) generation - now those OP's are getting done suddenly they feel they have the right to jump on any proj they want? BS!!!! Get off your asses and find new stuff - NO EXCUSES!!!!!

User avatar
CragRat
Posts: 68
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2007 10:54 am
Location: Centurion / JHB, South Africa

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by CragRat » Fri Apr 15, 2016 9:25 am

Waxing lyrical -

If one looks at all the posts on the subject, there seems to be a common thread that most normal individuals relate to as it is in all things in life. This is the theme of INVESTMENT (TIME and EFFORT) vs. REWARD which has a VALUE. Once the REWARD has been redeemed, you are SATISFIED and the VALUE reverts to ZERO and the whole cycle starts again.

The one parameter here that has many variables is REWARD as that has a different connotation set of CRITERIA per individual that determines the VALUE they want to get out at the end of the day to be SATISFIED.

Some may say that the reward for spotting a line and bolting it (investment) is to be the first to be on that line, work the virgin rock and then being the first to send it and hand it off to the community. If these criteria are met the reward has been redeemed, value obtained, satisfaction guaranteed and there is no more reward to be obtained (value is now ZERO). Moving onto next project.

Others may say the reward for spotting a line and bolting it (investment) is to bolt a line that they can immediately hand over to the community so that anyone can get FA and be enjoyed by all for ever more. As above the criteria are set, met, value and satisfaction obtained and in this case may continue every time someone says "what a king line".

The permutations are many.

I however don't subscribe to the movie of stealing someones investment, denying them their reward and then saying you are satisfied and feel good about yourself. This is the mindset of an asshole. At the end of the day would you rather be the person who spends 30min. in traffic and gets through the traffic lights feeling you did the right thing or be the asshole taxi driver who goes down the yellow line, cuts in at the front and gets there before you.

Time for a Cappuccino

micky
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 10:03 am
Location: Cape Town

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by micky » Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:07 am

Here's another way of looking at it.

First Ascent, Red Point, Flash, clean ascent, etc etc. These are all rules that as a climbing collective community we have made up to help define our sport. Essentially its all meaningless, but we has a community have assigned meaning to these 'rules'

So one can argue about who deserves first ascent etc and there might be valid points on both sides. What i think is worth asking though, is what kind of community do you want to be a part of? Do you want it to be a space of rad people supporting and respecting each other, regardless of the grade they climb. Or do you want a community based on pissing over each others efforts and stepping over each other for personal glory. I choose the former.

So imaging someone spots a cool trad line that is probably around 24. For that person its a project, it might take a while for that person, but he is super psyched on it and he's pushing his boundaries. In trad there isnt all the bolting time and money investment so some stronger trad dude could probably just walk up the line if he wanted and claim its rock, nobody owns it. However instead of doing that, the stronger climber respects the guys project, says 'hell yeah dude its an awesome line go for it' The stronger dude knows he can climb that thing in his sleep but he gets really psyched that others are getting psyched and pushing themselves which is kinda what climbing is about, not the grade.

So instead of pissing over each others efforts lets spend more time getting each other psyched, regardless of grade. We all started somewhere.

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 650
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by Forket » Fri Apr 15, 2016 7:32 pm

laizzes faire
Last edited by Forket on Fri Apr 15, 2016 11:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 650
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by Forket » Fri Apr 15, 2016 7:39 pm

Flex, thats what im gonna name the route you bolted that day
Last edited by Forket on Fri Apr 15, 2016 11:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 650
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by Forket » Fri Apr 15, 2016 7:43 pm

Paul :thumleft: :thumleft: :thumleft: :thumleft: :thumleft: :thumleft: :thumleft: :thumleft: :thumleft:

User avatar
proze
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:57 am
Real Name: Paul P
Location: CT

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by proze » Fri Apr 15, 2016 8:12 pm

Laissez-faire, maybe? Wouldn't want to be laissez-faire with language while being laissez-faire with the community's rules, right?

rocklooney
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:22 am
Real Name: Patrick Fraser

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by rocklooney » Fri Apr 15, 2016 8:15 pm

We've heard so many points of view in support of limited duration closed projects. I really don't think that anyone looking at this from the outside could want more justification for upholding the existing convention. It is grounded in respect and acknowledgement. Then there's the opposing point of view, grounded in defiance and noisy grandstanding. This is like trying to get two hopelessly polarised factions to agree to a compromise. There isn't any room for compromise and it's all a waste of time and effort. There's no negotiation here. Just the same old blah-blah. I say when some climber pisses on your battery at the crag and gets onto your closed project, don't waste time moaning about it here. Just pull the oke over and sort it out like it was done in the old days. Pay your admission of guilt fine, and go climbing. Nose re-configured, attitude adjusted, boom-box recycled, all good. I mean, take your Hilti down to your favourite trance-dance venue and try bolting the walls on Friday night at 11.00 p.m. The krag-apies will smoke you like a Marlboro. Sometimes it takes a bit of kinetic encouragement to help some people find their respect button and to remind them that they're not the centre of the universe.

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 650
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by Forket » Fri Apr 15, 2016 11:20 pm

:*D you guys crack me up. Just dont pull an Oscar and do it through the bathroom door :pirat: and i can spell it the way i want when i FA it

User avatar
Forket
Posts: 650
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 7:34 pm
Real Name: Everyday Troll

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by Forket » Sat Apr 16, 2016 10:02 am

proze wrote:Laissez-faire, maybe? Wouldn't want to be laissez-faire with language while being laissez-faire with the community's rules, right?

Proze, since you seem to be a bit slow to follow, in this comparison ive compared you, the forum politicians, as being the "climbing government", where I see myself as part of the people you are oppressing.We are free to do as we want, yet you believe you can regulate my actions. You are wrong. So my next act in response to felx's viral forum topic, will be....
Attachments
Capture 1234.GIF
Capture 1234.GIF (16.12 KiB) Viewed 1383 times

rocklooney
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:22 am
Real Name: Patrick Fraser

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by rocklooney » Sat Apr 16, 2016 7:53 pm

Interesting analogy you made there - market forces. The same market forces that brought the Bank of England to its knees and made George Soros a dollar billionaire. I like it. As the leader of the oppressed in a climbing democracy that has been captured by tyrannical dictators who wish enforce a closed project policy on the suffering masses of climbers, you now have an opportunity to right the wrongs of the past and force those who wish to cling to power to abdicate their positions of self serving authority and hand that power to the people. The people that you have so selflessly served. All you need is a mandate. So let's get you one. Justin? How about setting up a poll on this website? Robert? How about voting forms and ballot boxes at City Rock in CT and JHB? The votes will be counted and we'll have the answer. If you win you'll get a red beret, a pair of dark Ray-Bans, a leather jacket, a C63 AMG and a tin of shoe polish and you will be the undisputed Commander in Chief of the South African climbing community, free to climb wherever and whatever you want, and to stop using capital letters for ever and spell words however you want. If you lose, well ... you could always go do some voluntary work for the SPCA.

P.S. The A in SPCA doesn't stand for "animals".

User avatar
proze
Posts: 452
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 10:57 am
Real Name: Paul P
Location: CT

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by proze » Sat Apr 16, 2016 10:52 pm

No Ebert, you just spelled it wrong. Everyone understood your attempt at cleverness. But carry on.

User avatar
XMod
Posts: 913
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:38 pm
Real Name: Greg Hart

Re: more on Ebert's Unholy Crusade.

Post by XMod » Sun Apr 17, 2016 7:28 pm

Clearly Ebert, you are either utterly dense or completely immune to reason. In short you lack empathy, which is the unmistakeable hallmark of all narcissists, sociopaths and psychopaths.

People like you, with their misguided sense of self-entitlement are the reason I no longer bolt much and when I do, I bolt something I want to do (bugger the community - after all theyre just a bunch of lazy thieves - right?) and I dont bother with a pathetic 'IP' written on the rock - I simply put solid steel locks on key hangers making the line unleadable by anyone else.

Its a shame that this sport, with a proud history of a hundred plus years of respect, honesty and camaraderie being the lifeblood of its existence, has devolved into a backstabbing, 'winner takes all' mess. And - even sadder - its only taken a few people to drag it down there.

Nobody is 'persecuting' you (I mean please - get a grip!), all people are calling for is a common respect for each other. The fact that you feel outside of the general status quo should tell you something. Be lekka - dont be a poes.

Post Reply