Forum: GLOBAL / News / Best ever Lead WC semifinal for Asia Login in to contribute
Best ever Lead WC semifinal for Asia
  2017-10-08 00:00:00    
The biggest sensations in the semifinal in Wujiang were that The #1 and #2 in the Bouldering World Cup, Jongwon Chon and Tomoa Narasaki made it to the finals as #4 and #5. When they both last tried a Lead WC in 2014 and 2013, they ended #23 and #24. In fact, another three Asians qualified to the Top-8 semifinal which might be the first indicating that the Asians will take over the show also in Lead.

Add to that is Narasaki's 7.85 in the Speed qualifications although he has just tried it out for a couple sessions during some months.

Among the female, no big surprises and we saw Janja Garnbret topping out in a good style followed by Anak Verhoeven as normally, followed by Jain Kim and Akiyo Noguchi. Complete results The Live-streaming from the final starts 18.50 GMT+8, which means 12.50 European time.
OffLine Bojan
  2017-10-08 10:16:33    
>"Jongwon Chon and Tomoa Narasaki made it to the finals as #4 and #5"

#5 and #6 actually. And not a big surprise. Lead is becoming more boulder style and climbers are "forced" to train both lead and boulder (and speed) if they want to stay in their national teams in front of the olympics. Munich was in August so they have enough time for this.

Also, several great climbers (Ondra, Schubert, Megos, McColl...) are missing.
OffLine TJ Vrag
  2017-10-08 12:34:21    
I really don't understand why this would be a sensation. This is not lead anymore. It's IFSC on rope boulder.
Climbers positioned from 14 to 26th place have average result of 10 moves. This is a boulder length. 8 guys climbed more than 20 moves with maximum of 32 moves. This has not much to do with lead climbing which used to be mainly about endurance.
Sport climbing (also competitions) used to be relaxing and entertaining sport. I don't believe lead climbers enjoy to climb 10 moves. Their fans enjoy it even less. Sponsors don't like to see it. For people not familiar with sport climbing only 8 climbers seem relatively good. It's hard to understand the point of climbing half of the route if the goal of the sport is to reach the top.
With this system the lead is dead, as I've wrote many times. That's probably good for rock climbing which remains enjoyable, watchable and also has more publicity.
OffLine Federico Trespiernas
  2017-10-08 17:10:50    
So that's what this was about? Okay, lead is now four boulders in a row. Now let's make a little longer boulder (maybe traverses, routeset note), and a little more crimpy, less juggy speed, and you will achieve the Olympic goal, the same four guys on all three podiums and an undisputed "Olympic champion" in the eyes of the mass media. (Big LOL here)
OffLine Jan V'
  2017-10-09 08:56:21    
TJ Vrag You've got it wrong I think. It is not boulder on rope. Yes, ten climbers weren't good enough (for different reasosns - some of them not strong enough, some of them did not executed the move right way) to make past 10th move. The route was much longer though; somehow you've managed to miss that. It is thing of their performance they've managed 10 moves and not more.

How is 20 or 32 moves boulder? It is not, simple as that. Boulder guys had quite some time to train for lead climbing but at the end, Stefano Ghisolfi and his endurance or lead abilities won, so...even this proves it is not bouldering on the rope. On top of that, you've always had guys like Ondra, McColl or Schubert among the best at both bouldering and lead climbing able to even win or podium both in one season and no one complained lead climbing is bouldering on the rope. Or was it perhaps the other way round back then - bouldering was leading climbing without rope? :)

The difference is routes are shorter because of six minutes time limit, but it's still lead climbing, endurance required. Lead climbing doesn't exclude hard, bouldery moves; quite on the contrary many routes out there include them. Personally I like it more than monotonous crimping all the way until they fall. Including some difficult to read a and hard, interesting moves is nice and, as I've pointed out, it is not something artificial.
You probably don't realize one thing which could make it easier to digest for you; there are longer and shorter routes and longer and shorter boulders out there. Short routes and long boulders might be close to each other in terms of move count.
OffLine J. Smith
  2017-10-09 11:35:50    
Jan V', in my opinion you don't understand what TJ and Federico wanted to point. Lead used to be the competition version of rock ascents. It was relaxed, entertaining and enjoyable. Boulders used to be a discipline of strength and flexibility. Both disciplines were and still are practiced by recreational climbers. They can be practiced from age 4 to 80. As I know almost nobody practices speed as recreational activity. Competition sport climbing used to be connected to the climbing community.
Now we have parkour oriented high boulders and extremely short lead - both with shorter and shorter time limitations. None of disciplines have the charm of original sport climbing.
We all know that rock ascents are more valuable for climbing community and media than competition results. Competitions will only be interesting for media if the climbing community will have interest in it. If only competitors, their trainers and relatives will be interested in the sport, no media will be attracted. Olympics won't help.
I don't see any charm in on rope boulder-speed discipline (the modern lead). Who will watch it? Who will compete it if climbing community, sponsors and media won't be interested? And beside - why to have 3 disciplines if lead is combined of speed and boulder.
Each successful sport must have stars. Who are the stars of sport climbing? Do they have strong connection to the IFSC climbing? How will on rope speed-boulder make them? The basic question here is not whether TV likes the sport. The main concern is whether the climbing community will support it. If 100 millions people will ask for sport climbing on TV, sport climbing will be on TV even if the event takes 3 hours. Tennis game or cycling tour can be longer, but they are regularly presented by several TV channels.
OffLine rai
  2017-10-09 16:51:51    
Perfectly summarised by J.Smith. In fact Ondra had a mega press coverage on redpointing Silence, even more that his title in Bercy. Now the mass knows him and Flatanger. Stefano Ghisolfi; Jakob Schubert (with two 9b's) are in the very top of the game of both comp and rock, and even more Megos even if he's not a world cup winner (which we saw in Arco that he can perfectly do it). Someone like Romain Desgranges is only known by the community to spend most of his time training and competing (I'm happy for him that his focus is now paying), but it would good for him to make some big achievements on rock to get to the same status of the other ones mentionned above, which I think he is perfectly capable of. Idem for Janja.
OffLine TJ Vrag
  2017-10-09 20:13:39    
Jan V, of course you may have your opinion. But if the IFSC champions would be the real stars of the sport climbing, Ramonet would be number 1 star with his 21 victories. Instead of being a big star, he is slowly pushed out of the game. It's frustrating for him and his fans and a shame for IFSC.
Why do you think that the winner of some on rope boulder will become the idol of climbing community if even Ramonet didn't become one.
OffLine Jan V'
  2017-10-10 17:00:06    
TJ Vrag you reactions is OT. Almost no consequence with what you've wrote previously. You didn't adress my arguments. Instead you are pushing point elsewhere. I wonder why you do that.

Whilst on one hand you say I may have my opinion, on the other you've said: "Why do you think that the winner of some on rope boulder will become the idol of climbing community if even Ramonet didn't become one." I've said I don't consider lead climbing bouldering on the rope; thus you clearly didn't respec my opinion.

I won't comment on your reaction (at least for now) because it's OT anyway - except for Ramon: regarding Ramon I don't think that one climber who got worse proves that lead climbing is not lead climbing anymore. That's seriously faulty logic you have. Every athlete gots worse time to time, or with age eventually. So no frustration for me as a fan and no shame for IFSC. Just normal sport; happens all the time.

Btw. Ramonet probably was biggest star at some point of his carreer, but not anymore. Happens all the time in sport.
P.S. It's even arguable whether he is the best historically. Certainly he was one of the best at lead climbing, real beast. In bouldering or speed - no.
OffLine TJ Vrag
  2017-10-10 19:13:52    
Jan V, if you don't see the connection between the topics, it's more yours problem than mine. I've written that you may have your own opinion. You believe 1,2 or 3 minutes climbing with 10 to 30 moves is lead. I believe it's on rope boulder or even better on rope speed boulder as someone has written. You believe this is attractive, I find it boring, frustrating and not entertaining.
If 90 or even 99% of climbing community are following your logic, IFSC has no problem. If 20, 30 or even more % think my way, there is a problem.
OffLine Jan V'
  2017-10-14 19:25:58    
TJ Vrag unable to acknowledge your mistake. That's just you, at the end. I didn't expect anything else :)