Mammut Bus
Vertical-Life
Climb to Paris
POWERED BY Mammut Logo
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
meters to Paris
VERTICAL-LIFE STATS
0
Members
0
Total ascents
0
Ascents last 30 Days
0
Ascents last 24 hours
Open forum

Repeats in scorecards

What is the deal with people putting repeats in their scorecards? If you are using your scorecard as a log there is no way you are going to keep putting in a route you are doing laps on ten times or more. So it seems people only do this to boost their score? This seems pretty dumb to me. Is there an established protyocol for this?
hey, you're completely right. A route should just be put in once. When you repeat it, nice for you, but you shouldn't change the date of your personal first ascent of a specific route. Worse is, like you said, to put it in several times... ->bad karma
The webmaster is making it possible to register repeats which will be counted once every 12 months.
So if you re-redpoint something you get points for it again?
If you repeat Action direct the second year you get the points again, yes!
That's stupid. A route must count once. Once in your life...
A route only counts once in both the annual and all time high ranking. However, a climber that does the same ten 9a's every year is still the best in the world.
yes... I agree
I totally agreed with Josu. To me a route counts once in a lifetime. It does not matter how many time you repeat it. The first time and only the first should count!
It is clear that one route should count only once every year. ;) Daron, you agree with Juso who seems to agree with me. Did you get my point? If one person repeats 10 different 9a's year after year, he is still the best!
So what? You just climb to get points and be at the top of the ranking or what? What a nice climbing spirit, if you repeat a route one year after you done it and put it again on your scorecard it is only in order to have points, people can do that if they want and if you allow it but that is really shity, why not chip 10 routes of your style and do them once a year to be the best while you're at it, or register routes in gym, you do 10 9a's per year in a gym you're also the best so why not (nonsens) It seams like everybody in this forum is against repeats so why not forbide them in scorecards? Who except 8a.nu would say he wants to authorize reapeats? Or who would have the courage to say it...?
Yep, Possibility to register repeats every year and get a points for it? no... Don't care for the numbers so much. And don't climb the routes twice :) One route, one boulder - one count. --- one more thing. it is harder to climb new 9a than reapet the same 9a, isn't it? Jonas
OK to make it clear, it should be possible to register a route only once, that's simple!
I am pretty new to all this but I would think that to gain points it should be counted once yearly as you could run out of places to go around your home area and never really move much except for vacation times.
What about freepoint/ redpoint? Several routes I did until now only in freepoint, why not repeating them some day in redpoint and upgrading my scoring card then? especially going second on a multi-pitch wall.
The eternal debate... The answer is pretty simple. This site is used to compare the achievements of climbers. If most climbers do NOT register repeats, the one who does doesn't compete fairly. As to how you want to create rankings, it's a matter of perspective. You could make a route-ascent relationship, allowing multiple ascents per route per climber. People who wish to use the scorecard as a log will be free to do so, and the way you present the information into a ranking is a matter of choice for the administrators of this site. It should be pointed out that since you cannot prevent people from changing the dates of their original ascent to register a repeat, it would be best to implement a mechanism to satisfy those needs and then, compute the ranking while you have correct information instead of re-arranged scorecards. The ranking calculations could then easily do something like, for each route, it's value in points is from the ascent with the best style (if a redpoint post-dates a freepoint for instance), it's date of ascent is the oldest date of an ascent with that style in the scorecard. If repeats are to be counted, they can easily be associated a malus that would differenciate, for instance, someone who has done new 9a's to someone who has repeated the same 9a's. Someone who does 10 new 9a's is considerably better than someone who does the same 9a's, but how does this compare between grades? It is the same type of difference than style of ascent; repeat is a style in its own. It is the style where you have the MOST information on a route, (as opposed to onsight=NONE, flash=SOME, redpoint=ENOUGH). Most information, because, you have integrated more info (beta, movement engrams, etc) than was needed by a redpoint, by working the route yet again, and perfected your climbing on it. It is, in fact, easier than before. This begs another differenciation, to be correct, I think you need the following categories with bonuses that can be combined: Styles: on-sight, flash, redpoint, repeat Protection: freepoint, redpoint, trad placing gear. If we keep the usual bonuses and say, for instance, trad protection gives a + 1/2 level bonus, and repeat gives a -1/2 level bonus, let's say you redpoint an 8a trad, placing gear the first time: 8a rp=1000, trad = +25 = 1025 Then you re-do it another year, on toprope: 8a = 1000, freepoint = -60, repeat = -25 = 915 (comparable to a new 7c trad rp).
I agree with Jens, although in some cases doing it should only count once really, on the harder problems, especially 8a+ the ability to do these problems changes per year, so repeats should definately count, because if you do them once and never again, that is not near as good as doing them mutliple times. Especially in the case that yearly rankings are here for competition, we are not looking for the guy with the most variety, but the one who has the most strength, so why give credit to the kid who does three 9a's and a bunch of lowers, and not put him below the guy who repeats 5 9a's and ascends two new 9a's. It doesn't make sense to say the kid is better, and although my example may not be precise, I am sure you can see how this would heavily affect the scorecard of some of our top people.
!!! It's pretty clear that the 8a.nu ranking system is made on personal choices, guesses and ideas from the webmasters. wouldn't be different if anyone else made his own "rules" for it the truth is : outdoor climbing is a sport that at the same time needs competitive spirit and refuses strict competitions. most of us are driven by the desire of being stronger (than ourselves in the past, than our friends, than everybody else). But, at the same time, everybody wants to define his own rules and game. this is why every time you take something like the 8a.nu ranking too seriously, you're most likely disappointed by some detail you consider "wrong" or "unfair" : because they didn't made the website at your own image, and at the same time as a climber you appreciate and seek the idea of playing your own game, with your own rules and your own standards. Also, I find that this is the biggest issue with 8a.nu : on one side you have sharing and definition of common views (eg definition of onsight/flash/redpoint ethics,  belaying tricks, etc). On the other, you have the risk of going too far trying to "set common standards". This is where some people start to either laugh or get disappointed about the site. Last but not least : always remember we have plastic and official competitions indoors, for god's sake...
I look at my ranking in the North American 35+ category and note that in the top 10 at least one scorecard has multiple flash ascents of the same route. Another is from a false name and a birthday in the 16th century. Emails to the webmaster have gone unanswered which is fine I suppose but why bother with rankings at all if there is no common standard especially in the top 25 of any given category? I think that repeats should count, maybe a little more off the point total, say 25. There should probably be at least a year between them.
The only valuable advice about this is: don't take it too seriously. The top 25 of any category makes me laugh... what about the maltese female 35+ top 25? At low level there is no point in repeating a route except for training: that makes for a nice log book ascent if you wish to keep track of it. Regarding the system, you can't prevent people to cheat and you don't expect people to act as some "scorecard police", plus there's absolutely nothing to win when gaining places in the ranking. Anybody should record whatever he wants to record. If someone is ahead of me with an "onsight repeat second go trad route with bolts (this cumulates the bonuses)"... so what? OK he's a cheater or more probably someone who does not understand the meaning of all options in the scorecard, but does this compensate for the thousands of climbers who are better than me and don't have a scorecard? Don't think so. For top level climbers (maybe the top 15), I think they are more or less professional climbers and should satisfy some ethics regarding the ranking. Plus they have certainly the opportunity to climb in other places or to set new routes if they run out of projects in their vicinity. So repeats should definitely not be an option for them (and I don't think they use this option anyway). But in terms of fair play and ranking accuracy, you should also look at why the hell people can get different scores for the same route in the same style. People should be able to register ascents with the grade they think correct and the score from the consensus (or average?) grade. It seems far more important if you want some "justice" in the ranking than deleting an option that is not used by the people for who the ranking is significant.
Just give the repeat a logbook score. T
PREVIOUS
1