There are no official rules for climbing, it's all just a convention of the people that are currently leading the sport. As Alex said, just be open about it and after that it only matters how you feel about that ascent. I think that sponsors and the climbing community are ok with small issues on this big wall climbs as long as the crux was done clean. In bouldering or short sport routes the "rules" are more stringent because you can always repeat it next day. But repeating an entire expedition just because a insignificant pitch was done in two pieces doesn't make sense as long as it was climbed somehow.

There's this guy who recently critiqued Reinhold Messners 8000er ascents by saying he wasn't on the actual top of many of them. He would have a field day with this topic! Eberhard Jurgalski. In my opinion, as long as you're honest, anything goes. What's crucial is that there's communication and openness in the climbing community, not unnecessarily stiff and arbitrary rules.

@nilsp9426

Ай бұрын

But just because someone comes up with accusations it doesn't make it interesting or relevant. Only if there is compelling evidence it should concern anyone. There are a lot of people trying to get attention in the flood of news that is the internet...

Every move has been free climbed is the truth. It has not all been led free; it has not been led free in one push. Many a first free climb of old Yosemite aid pitches; especially one or two pitch routes were done yo yo style with different climbers starting their lead on TR from the high point

I think that most people who have been serious about climbing for a long time don't care WHAT you call your style of ascent, we just want an honest account of what you (or we) did.

@Internetprolet1312

9 ай бұрын

I mean in the end don’t we all do it for our own? I personally don’t have to prove to anyone that I ascended this or that

The fish I caught last week was "THIS BIG!" . . . . . . ego, ego, ego.

I found this quite comforting. My 2 hardest leads were both flawed. I was way too harsh in myself about them. One was a straight forward belayer supplying beta. Lots of it and it really made a difference. So I did the route on-site but not flashed i think. So do I get to claim the grade? The other one I’m not told is a non issue. We were on a sea cliff in a rising tide and big seas. The whole bottom of our route was wet. So I got to lead out on to pitch of another route. But I did feel under pressure not to mess about over style. I went to finger lock a crack. I couldn’t because there was still the remains of a wooden wedge at the back of the crack. It was covered in chalk so I pinched it. At the time I felt like if pulled on a peg. But I’m told what I did was standard. Any thoughts?

@AllPsychBouldering

8 ай бұрын

Flash is doing the route the first time with beta, on-sight is doing the route first time with no beta. If you send it without hanging or falling with or without beta you get the grade no matter how many tries it took but if it took more than one time you call it a redpoint. That's the general convention with sport climbing at least. As for the second scenario idk.

@Yildun28

8 ай бұрын

Redpoint always strikes me as redundant with send. I see it in climbing definitions and on the internet, but I've never actually heard it used it real life, so I wonder if like pinkpoint it's starting to age out with the rise of gym climbing. Everyone I know just says "send" to specify finishing without rests or falls, flash to indicate a 1st attempt send, and on-sight to indicate a 1st attempt send with no prior knowledge (like watching your buddy crush it.) Any of those can apply to lead or toprope, so we just specify "lead send" or "sent on lead." Not sure what "redpoint" really adds over send other than emphasizing that it was a project.

This kinda shocked me!

New here, can someone explain to me what exactly is going on here?

In the golden age of climbing; doing it from a no hands rest was considered good.

For most of us it's just a hobby like golf or bowling. Have fun, don't take it so serious. Notice I didn't say "like fishing". They definitely lie! (lol) 😃

I remember Kevin Jorgeson fall mid-pitch during the first ascent of the Dawn Wall. On the live web broadcast. He started back from a no-hand stance right where he fell and finished the pitch. No lower to the previous belay... I believe it was on a 5.12 overhung flared chimney / corner. Everyone was waiting on the top to congratulate the team. Am-I the only one who remembers this? I was chocked that no one discussed this subject ever afterwards... Nothing to remove from the ascent really but just some cool fine details about it!!

What is the fabricated ascent that Honnold mentions as a big lie in climbing?

@magnusskoglund8885

9 ай бұрын

Maestri’s climb of Cerro Torres in Patagonia.

@zackgabanyicz4166

9 ай бұрын

Cesare Maestri and Cerro Torre in Patagonia. Kelly Cordes has a great article in Climbing about it.

no one cares. If you really want to test yourself against Honold, go do any 3 of his free solos, just do them faster.

This clown never climbed el 🧢itan without a rope. If anyone here gives me the so called entire 3 hour video of him climbing the mountain than ill review it and give you my thoughts about it . The clown obviously did this for Clout ,to attract a huge fan base ,to make a one in a life time documentary and to acquire bank. Baited everyone and 90% of you fell for it. If you see his fake solo climb in the documentary its cut up into small clips of him climbing the mountain and does not show the full 3 hour video of him climbing the mountain. ( as he said ,it only took him a little more than 3 hours) cgi and green screen could have easily been used by the national geographic team and his team to make seem like he was climbing solo without any rope. Anyway this is a real insult to REAL PEOPLE who accomplish REAL achievements.