GO TO GLOBAL SITE   se es us fr za it
de ca au no
at br ru ch
gb pl nl sk
Home | News | Videos | Articles | Gallery | Crags | Gyms | Search - Tick List | Forum | Ranking | Blogs | Contact | New Member
Forum: GLOBAL / Editorial / Who onsighted and redpointed 9a first? Login in to contribute
Who onsighted and redpointed 9a first?
OffLine 8a.nu
  2018-03-18 00:00:00    
Estado Critico was set up in 2004 as a 9a but was later down graded. In 2010, a hold broke and it was back to 9a and in 2013 Alex Megos made his historical onsight. Several climbers have later confirmed that grade but also 8c+ have been forwarded by Gonzalo Larrocha as he found a new sequence. Last week Jon Cardwell and Matty Hong did it in just six respectively three tries saying their personal grade would be 8c+.

One year before Megos onsigted Estado Critico, Adam Ondra onsighted Golden Ticket down grading it to 8c+. Later Adam has onsighted three 9a's which all have been confirmed.

As of now, Megos should be credited for onsighting the first 9a but it just might be that a new sequence have been found of Estado Critico and Ondra should get the historical fame?

When it comes to redpointing, it seems Ben Moon and the UK scene thinks that based on the current gradings, Hubble done in 1990 should be considered the first 9a. Action Direct was given an UIIA grade equivalent to 8c+/9a in 1991 but has later been upgraded although an easier sequence have been found.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-18 10:42:13    
>"Last week Jon Cardwell and Matty Hong did it in just six respectively three tries saying their personal grade would be 8c+"

What is the exact source of these news?
If confirmed, La Cabane au Canada (Rawyl, Switzerland), onsighted in July 2013 by Ondra should be considered the first 9a onsight in history. Until the next downgrade ;)

>"When it comes to redpointing, it seems Ben Moon and the UK scene thinks that based on the current gradings, Hubble done in 1990 should be considered the first 9a"

Again, the exact source should be given. AFAIK, Hubble is now considered (hard) 8c+ or 8c+/9a, so AD remains the first 9a. Moon who later speculated Hubble should be 8c+/9a, failed to climb AD...
But Hubble may be considered hardest boulder(-route) 8B/+ of the time...
OffLine Ted Kingsnorth
  2018-03-18 12:34:05    
Ben Moon didn't fail to climb AD. He got a bad finger injury while trying it in 1992 so had to quit trying it
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-18 14:03:38    
Sorry, but "He got a bad finger injury while trying it in 1992" is pretty much the same to me as saying "he failed to climb it" (esp. when he got injured *while* trying it). But anyway, I'm not trying to say he was not "able to", as much as e.g. Manolo was "able to" climb 9b at the late eighties.
OffLine Jorge
  2018-03-18 15:27:46    
We will have to wait until the ban on kneebars is lifted on Hubble
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-18 16:38:35    
>"Last week Jon Cardwell and Matty Hong did it in just six respectively three tries saying their personal grade would be 8c+"

What is the exact source of these news?

Please read the news from last week to get their quote.

It say in the Ben Moon autobiography that Hubble is 9a.
"Two minutes later he had made rock-climbing history with the first ascent of Hubble, now widely recognised as the world's first F9a."
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-18 18:46:44    
>Please read the news from last week to get their quote.

I have read it and seen the quote, but I still don't know what's the *source*. Did you see the quote in Instagram (some link?) or is it some personal communication (email) you had with one of them? Which one? Jon or Matty?

Same goes with Hubble. "Ben Moon and the UK scene thinks" and "now widely recognised as the world's first F9a" (quote by Ed Douglas, his autobiographer, paid by the copies sold) are not good enough. As for now, Hubble has seen 8 ascents. In order to propose a consensus grade for Hubble, you should know (and publish) the comments on grade of *those 8 climbers*, not "UK scene" or his autobiographer.

I mean, if you are trying to rewrite the history you should be exact about the facts. And don't get me wrong. If the 8c+ suggestion by Jon and Matty is reliable and correct, the history should be rewritten (as it was in several other cases).
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-18 20:24:03    
Jon Cardwell has sent me an email which I have quoted in some old news.

Cardwell and Hong have reached out saying that as it only took them 6 respectively 3 tries. "We think that the grade of Estado Critico is much more 8c+ than 9a :) It’s rather hard and bouldery still but just not enough for 9a."

Also Ben Moon says he is the one in the world that did the first 9a and so does several more.

I am not trying to rewrite the history, I am asking a question as there are different opinions around.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-18 22:02:31    
Your were maybe not trying, but you just did ;)

Two fast repeats with new beta by two climbers experienced for the grade is enough to rewrite it.
So, from now on "La Cabane au Canada (Rawyl, Switzerland), onsighted in July 2013 by Ondra should be considered the first 9a onsight in history".

But, your arguments for Hubble are too weak for an upgrade.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-18 22:18:51    
I guess there are many who still think Megos did the fist 9a onsight and that Ben Moon have done the first 9a redpoint.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-19 06:53:44    
It's not about what 'many still think', it's about how consensus grades are formed. And here opinions of those who actually sent the route are most (if not only) important.

Here's Megos's comment on Hubble's grade:
"Let’s just say I’ve climbed some 8c+ that have felt a lot harder. And I’ve climbed some 8c+ that have felt a lot easier."
http://www.planetmountain.com/en/news/interviews/alexander-megos-climbs-hubble-the-raven-tor-interview.html
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-19 07:50:42    
Of course, also the opinions from the guys who failed to do a route should also be considered. Adam Ondra has tried to do it and he has said it could be 9a.

It would be very strange if 100 guys tried to make the first repeat of a route and even if non could do it, their opinion of a possible upgrade would not count.

Also on Ben Moon Wikipedia it says Hubble is now considered 9a.
OffLine Ido Vlaardingerbroek
  2018-03-19 09:37:44    
Jens the wikipedia page is not an extra reference they have taken that from Ondra's comment. Of course Ondra is quite an authority on the issue but so is Megos.
OffLine John Render
  2018-03-19 12:14:56    
@ Jens, Wikipedia weighing in on this means little. Anyone can edit Wikipedia, and make it say pretty much what they like.

Adam is obviously one of the top grading experts on the planet. He is not the only one, though, and as Ido points out other opinions count as well. The fact that he didn't climb a route that is either 9a or even 8c+ says to me it doesn't fit his style well. Can anyone fill in the details of Adam's attempt(s) at Hubbell, i.e. when (was it recently or when he was much younger/weaker), conditions, number of tries, etc?
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-19 14:56:21    
The reference for the Ben Moon Wikipedia is an interview with Adam Ondra.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-19 15:15:55    
Grading is enough mess as it is.
If someone is trying to base consensus grades also with the opinions of those who haven't send a route or the opinion of 'UK scene' and 'the autobiographers' etc. the mess will be even greater.
So let stick with the opinions of the guys who actually tried and succeeded to climb the route, possibly with the authentic opinions from reliable, public sources. A nice example of this is hardclimbs.info, which carefully collects all the sources (video, articles, insta, FB, databases like 8a etc.) in which the ascensionists comment about the route/problem in general and about the grade in particular. Unfortunately, this site only includes routes/boulders 9b/8C and above, so more work is needed for lower grades...
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-19 15:29:41    
The possibly best reference, at least when it comes to down grades, is actually 8a.nu as we have been the one having first talked about possible down grades for a number of routes as well for big areas like Ticino, Rocklands etc.

The easiest way to predict down gradings are to check which routes are the most repeated. Further more, you can also use Time Comparison Grading Analyses to get a better understandings.

The history shows that consensus is actually not so good as most climbers do not give opinions or confirm grades, instead they just use the topo grade.

It is good that grading is a mess because this shows that they should not be considered so important as they just might change in the future.
OffLine Marcel Heemskerk
  2018-03-19 16:35:11    
FYI, Coincidentally I spoke with Adam Ondra last week about Hubble, and he does not call it 9a.

He does think the crux is the first 8B+ boulder. How that translates to route grading is left as an exercise for the reader :-).
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-19 17:02:04    
8B+ is for me equivalent to hard 8c+ and then, to finish off Hubble, you have an 8a route so that just make it squeeze into the 9a barrier.
OffLine John Render
  2018-03-19 22:31:44    
@ Jens, I just read Ben Moon's Wiki page. It cites an interview Planet Mountain ran with Ondra in 2012. In that interview Ondra does not say Hubble is 9a. He calls it the world's first 8c+, that could easily be 9a. He tried it on two separate days: once in 2010, when he nearly finished it despite not being fresh after just competing in the WC, and one morning a year later, in 2011, when he came even closer.

Adam is now way stronger than he was in 2010 or 2011: back then he was only 16 or 17 years old. Would be interesting to see him try Hubble again, and give his opinion.

btw, Ben's Wiki page says the boulder problem is 8B, not 8B+.
OffLine John Render
  2018-03-19 22:54:42    
Some more info that seems relevant to Hubble: I just read Planet Mountain's 2016 interview with Megos, right after he sent Hubble. Megos says Hubble is an 8B boulder, which finishes with a 7c/c+ sports route. By your accounting, Jens - where 8B+ followed by 8a barely squeezes into 9a - wouldn't that make Hubble 8c+ at best?

Here's Alex' exact quote:

"It’s only about 8m high. You have the first two quickdraw pre-clipped, make two moves to get off the deck, and then it immediately kicks in with 4 hard moves. This could be 8B boulder I reckon. After which it’s pretty much over, from the last hard move it gets significantly easier to reach the top."

Alex says, "Only four hard moves, of which three are tiny undercuts. And after 4 meters it’s all over."

He also says "it’s all over in probably less than 30 seconds!" i.e. the hard part takes under a half minute, and the rest is 7c or 7c+ climbing.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-20 07:11:30    
>"The history shows that consensus is actually not so good as most climbers do not give opinions or confirm grades, instead they just use the topo grade."

That's the problem of 8a.nu. If you try to enter your *ascent* in 8a's scorecard and does *NOT* want to express your opinion on the grade, your are not able to, because selecting grade from the drop-down list in the ascent entry form is *required* in order to finish your entry.

I've told you this several times before. This is the systematic bias of 8a.nu, but you still don't want to admit -- or better CHANGE -- it.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-20 07:20:33    
Most climbers do not want to express their opinion of the grades so they just select the topo grade. We do not want to have such focus on grades so we should have two grades columns as have been suggested by many. Grades are very important for the media but it should not be of such great importance for the climbers.
OffLine Adam Wood
  2018-03-20 08:01:24    
What we know about Hubble is,
It's nails, had very few ascents considering its age and has shutdown some very very good climbers over the years (although they often had limited time and less than perfect conditions). The crux is rumored to be around 8B/+ followed by 7c+. Its grade in the current area guidebook is 9a, upgraded apparently after seeking various opinions of people who had climbed or attempted to climb it and had experience of the grade. I've never seen anything in writing about this process, and the decision to upgrade it in the guidebook. I think it would be really interesting to know the background especially considering the historical significance. I imagine Hubble will always be a hard one to grade, being so short, and also in a very specific style. Although as Jens pointed out we could imagine that an 8B/+ into 7c+ could be 9a, after all Daniel Woods just described Jungle Speed 9a as hard 8B into 8a, though comparisons like this never tell the full story.
OffLine Franz the Stampede
  2018-03-20 12:39:41    
Good analysis Adam Wood, but Jungle Speed has had a few proposed downgrades (Moroni and Midtbø if I'm not mistaken).
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-20 14:25:44    
>Most climbers do not want to express their opinion of the grades

That's exactly my point!! They don't want to but you (8a.nu) *forse them* to 'propose' grade otherwise they could NOT enter their ascents.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-20 14:38:23    
We do not force them... they can simply just add the ascent through the Tick List and the grade is already registered.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-20 16:14:01    
The headline is a question and it seems there are different opinions who did the first 9a redpoint and onsight. Personally I have not have a clear opinion. We will have to wait for more climbers opinion after they have tried the different routes.
OffLine Adam Wood
  2018-03-20 22:25:14    
Franz: I think the same Woods article mentioned a hold breakage on JS so it was considered 9a again.
Li: If anybody has rewritten history it would be the current guidebook authors. A comment from them would be awesome, how about it Jens?
I don't think many people in the UK care about the grade, it's Hubble and it's just plain hard. Any ascent of it is a big deal, even 27 years after the FA it's still rarely climbed, and that says far more than the grade.
OffLine Henning Wang
  2018-03-20 22:51:00    
@Franz: A hold broke in the crux on Jungle Speed, this is the reason for Daniels recent "upgrade". The route was never close to 9a before (8A+ boulder to 8a route with a good jug in between).

@Li-How: Actually you can, tho it will take a while for people to re-learn speculations given as facts before the final verdict has been given. This is how it is with many things in climbing and grading.
Take Nalle's 9A or Adam's 9c for example. Right now these two are listed in climbing history as the first to climb the respective grades. But reality is that they are the first to step up and propose these grades and only time will show if they in fact are the actual first.
A.k.a you can't say these are historical facts that can't be changed.
The same goes for anything else grade related as it can take 20-30 years in some cases to get enough repeats/attempts to form a proper consensus for the grade, sometimes even more.

Estado Critico has since the begining (broken hold or not) been in the 8c+/9a range (this was also the original grade for the route), meaning Alex's onsight, tho super impressive, was never 100% certain to be the first real onsight of a confirmed 9a.
The only reason he is listed as the first is because he made the claim while Adam decided to not make the claim and downgrade the ones he did. As Estado still haven't settled on either, or still remains 8c+/9a, I'd say its too early to tell and history might very well "change" on the matter in the future.
Ashima made the same claim for first female 9a+ route based on a broken hold, but despite only 1 repeat since this was somehow forgotten or ignored when Margo did la Rambla.

The point being that grades are in flux and climbing as a sport is still young. You need to understand the difference between the first to propose or claim a grade and the one that eventually is listed as the first to actually reach that grade. In many cases these two will not be the same.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-21 16:35:56    
The last two guys who did Estado Critico, Jon Cardwell and Matty Hong, have said that for them it is 8c+ as they did it very quickly, six respectively three tries. Ganzalo Larrocha has also given it 8c+ and actually one more guy who has repeated it has told me that it is 8c+ but at that time he did not come forward to spoil Megos onsight.

If the next repeater of Estado Critico suggests 8c+ I guess we will have to call it 8c+ in the history books, meaning Adam Ondra did the first 9a onsight.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-21 18:16:23    
>"We do not force them... they can simply just add the ascent through the Tick List and **the grade is already registered**".

OK, a test-added Estado critico through the tick list. The *default* grade in the Grade drop-down control in the entry form is '9a', NOT 'I don't want to suggest a grade' (or 'I don't mind' or 'I don't have a clue' or whatever). So I believe most of those who don't want to express their opinion (or don't have one) just click [Add] and -- vuala!, Estado critico now has one more 'suggestion' of grade '9a' and so everybody should be quite sure EC is really 9a since a great majority of climbers have 'suggested' 9a, so we should be pretty sure the consensus grade is exactly 9a.

If you don't see a systematic bias there (with degree in statistics?!), then I'm over and out.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-21 18:55:54    
As I have said before, most just use the topo or the most common grade. This is why we should not use the average as the consensus grade. I have said this for 15 years now :)

If some 20 % have given another grade I normally report it as 8a (+) and when it is 50 % that normally means that the down grade suggestion has been confirmed and is official. However, this is not a science as grades are subjective and routes change etc. I do think that also the guys who could not do a route have a saying when it comes to the grade we should report.

The more we move away from grade science and say they are subjective, the less importance they get and I like that.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-22 06:00:47    
>"As I have said before, most just use the topo or the most common grade."

Are you trying to make fool out of me? Or are you just bluffing?

As I told you, I wanted to enter EC and *don't want to express my opinion* about the grade (for whatever reason, but let's say I feel it's easier than 9a, but I'm not sure how much, it may be 8c or 8c+ or sth in between). Even if I chose '-' (no grade) in [Grade] drop-down list in entry form, **the grade 9a appears** in my scorecard, listed under 9a(?) routes, I have done so far (and it adds 1300 points to my score). Even worse, if you now check the EC 'search routes/boulders' page:

https://www.8a.nu/scorecard/Search.aspx?SearchType=ASCENTS&CragName=Siurana&AscentName=Estado+critico&AscentType=0

EC has a '9a' next to my name!! So it seems that I have *suggested* a 9a grade, which of course I'm not. In fact, I'm sure it's NOT 9a.

With such a flaw in system 8a is using to enter grades/ascents into it's database, 8a loose all credibility in trying to use 8a's 'grade suggestions' as the basis for what other people think about the grade, for proposing consensus grades etc.

Yeah, you are right, the grades are subjective, but on 8a.nu there's more: you don't know if grades listed there are grades at all!
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-22 07:59:05    
You are right and that is why you should only use the grades on 8a as an indication for what the climbers think. It is totally wrong to mathematically use it in order to get a consensus. Could you please remove Estado Critico from your scorecard.
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2018-03-22 09:51:17    
Jens, you seem to not understand the issue so I'll repeat what @Bojan is trying to say by explaining a little story.

Some countries have >80% organ donors and some countries have <20% organ donors. Want to know why? Politics? Religions? Organ donors campaigns?

None of that! It only comes down to the phrasing of the question. In some countries it is "Tick here if you want to be an organ donor", and in the others it's "Tick here if you DON'T want to be an organ donor". Given it's an hard choice, 80% of the people are unsure and simply don't tick anything, resulting in being organ donor or not just because they picked the default.

So, what Bojan is saying is that the same effect happens here in 8a.nu when you fill your scorecard, if you are unsure and don't want to "tick" you end up suggesting the default grade, instead of "no grade given". I'll let you make your own deductions about the relevancy of the 8a database on the default grade for a route.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-22 11:07:00    
As I have said, you should only use the 8a data base as an indication of what climbers think of the grades as most just use the topo grade or what have been reported before.

You do not have to mark if it is soft or hard and because of this, this can also be used to get a hint on grades.

Of course we could set up a system where climbers do not have to record a grade at all but I do not see this as a high priority as the current system have worked pretty ok for almost five million ascents.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-22 16:15:05    
>you should only use the 8a data base as an indication of what climbers think of the grades

On normal sites you should. But on 8a you generally shouldn't, cause you don't know if those grades were really suggested by the real human climbers or they were only 'filled in' by 8a's program code.

My guess is at least half of those 5 million ascents are 'computer filled in'. And yeah, sure, this filling in of "the current system have worked pretty ok".
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2018-03-23 10:03:30    
> As I have said, you should only use the 8a data base as an indication of what climbers think of the grades as most just use the topo grade or what have been reported before.

As we try to explain to you: no, the 8a database is NOT what climbers think of the grades, when the grade is the default one. You can only know what they think of the grade then the reported grade is not the default grade. When it is the default grade, you don't know wether they meant it's the default grade or if they just let the default answer, meaning "I don't want to give a grade".

To sum it up: the only meaningful part of the 8a database is when the grades are not the default one.

When it is the default grade, it's all up to speculations. 20% meant it? 50%? 70%? I'd guess around 50% given human nature.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-23 12:15:28    
The 8a data base with almost five million ascents has for 18 years worked as an indignation of When grades should be down graded. As a matter of a fact, down grade speculations and later confirmations are most found on 8a, helping the community, topo authers and media to get it right.
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2018-03-23 13:52:15    
indignation --> indication?

Yes it's what we are saying, the meaningful part of the 8a database is when the grades are not the default one.

Downgrades or upgrades are meaningful.

Default grades (or "topo" grade) are meaningless.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-23 17:55:24    
Please suggest how this should be done including how the ascent should be presented in the scorecards for the once not giving a grade incluidng the option when holds break or that many have given a grade below or above what is suggested in the topo. I see several problems and sure the current system is not perfect but it has worked out just fine for 5 million ascents.
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2018-03-23 21:57:31    
When reporting a route, the choice should be a dropdown like this:

Grade:

That is, "No opinion" is the default. And as Bojan said, make sure to report "No opinion" when someone selected "No opinion" on their scorecard and not the current grade of the route.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-23 22:32:04    
Sure but how would it look like in the scorecard including the above mentioned problems.
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2018-03-23 22:42:58    
You need to be more explicit about the problems you see, because I don't understand. I don't see any problems in just reporting what the user reported at the time he reported it.

If you are talking about the listings or the graphs, just include the additional info. I can make an example if needed.
OffLine Steve
  2018-03-24 00:29:32    
With this system here, you cannot infer a consensus grade from the rating of the users, but you can imply that the default grade is not the consensus, if a certain number of users takes the effort in changing the grade.
OffLine Gerald Kötele
  2018-03-24 09:05:06    
I like the idea because it motivates people to think about a eventual personal grade. For the scorecard the system could use the most used grade for the route. If someone doesn't give a grade for a FA, he/she doesn't get points...
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-24 21:17:55    
1. If you do not select a grade how should it be reported in the scorecard?
a. You are the first to do it.
b. There is just one guy who previously has selected a grade and he suggested a down grade of a previous confirmed route.
c. We now that a hold have broken making it easier or harder.

2. I guess only around 20 % actively give grade suggestions the other 80 % just follow the topo. Let us say we end up with only 50 % select a grade but at the same time many of them will not consider it a suggestion, they just go for the topo grade, i.e their grade can not anyhow by used for the consensus!

3. We have a system that works relatively good... we must be 100 % sure that a new system is much better... above are just some concerns I have, there are many more. Please explain in detail a solution for everything mentioned above otherwise it is not realistic to change a system that works good :)
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-25 15:51:08    
1. There are several reasonable ways for 'scorecard' grade:
a) calculated grade: median, average, trimmed average (you exclude eg. 10% lowest and 10% highest grades). You decide, there's not much difference between those (none in most cases).
b) in case there's a broken hold you should calculate scorecard grade before and after hold broke. All ascents before break should be given scores for the old scorecard grade, and all after the new scorecard grade.
c) in case new beta is found, only grades after this should count for the scorecard grade (and points). Scores for old ascents (after new beta was found) should be 'downgraded' (given points for new scorecard grade)
d) in rare cases (e.g. it is found that most of the routes in certain areas are overgraded) 8a editor may decide to exclude old grades from calculation of scorecard grade and suggest (e.g., from the new guidebook of an area) new scorecard grade (which may change in the future if different 'personal' grades are suggested later).

2. there is no problem if you strictly separate ascent(!) logs from grade suggestions. For ascents you just use points for the scorecard points (calculated as above). For calculation of the scorecard grade you only use grades that were explicitly marked as grade suggestions (aka 'personal grades').

3. yes, the system 'works', but why not fix the problems and make it better? The problems we were discussing above (broken holds, new betas, downgrades...) are NOT solved (are ignored) in current system, so let's change it and make it better.

But first think I suggest to change is ascent entry form. There you may (or may not) write the (current) scorecard grade (fixed text -- could not be changed) and a separate dropdown box [My grade suggestion] (personal grade) with *default* selection 'No opinion' (or 'I don't know').
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-25 18:47:56    
1. How to present the route in the scorecard if nobody have selected a grade.
a/b/c: We do normally not know when a hold broke and when we not know... it will be dead wrong with calculated grades.
In general I think this will increase the focus on grades and we do not want that.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-25 20:12:55    
>How to present the route in the scorecard if nobody have selected a grade.

Editor should enter the 'topo' grade (known from guidebook or other sources). Or just wait till someone suggests a grade (until then a route has no grade and no 'score').

>a/b/c: We do normally not know when a hold broke and when we not know

Then use all the grades suggested (until you know).

>In general I think this will increase the focus on grades and we do not want that.

It will increase focus on the *right* grades, ie. grades that you know who have suggested them and where they came from (how they are calculated/edited).
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2018-03-25 20:18:59    
Bojan pretty much said what I would have said so just re-read his last post, he makes very good points.

I'd only add that about the scorecard, I don't see a problem in reporting it filled under "No opinion" (or "I don't know").

We'd let the people report what they want to report instead of forcing them to report a grade, if someone decided not to give a grade I don't see why the scorecard should.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-25 20:27:09    
There are thousands of routes... we could not edit topo grades and we can not monitor everyone based on a hold break or a new sequence was found. Once we start presenting calculated grades, climbers will take it more serious... and we do not want to increase the focus on grades.

We will not know if the selected grade is an active choice or just a selection in order to get grade in their scorecard.

I see it as a big problem if actually only 50 % will select grades and another 30 % select the topo grade even if they do not consider it as a personal confirmation of the grade.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-26 11:31:05    
>There are thousands of routes... we could not edit topo grades and we can not monitor everyone based on a hold break or a new sequence was found.

Then trust the users (e.g. local climbers usually know when the hold breaks or a new beta is found) to do that. Or/and you (editor) may enter those in case you *do* know, e.g. you could 'reset' the grade of Estado critico, as you know from trustworthy source a new beta was found and 2 experienced climbers agreed (after fast ascents) it should be downgraded.

>We will not know if the selected grade is an active choice or just a selection in order to get grade in their scorecard.

You don't know *now*. But if you will make a change as I (and Philippe) have suggested, you will know what are grade suggestions (which are used for scorecard grade calculations) and what are just ascent logs (which should get points for current scorecard grade).

>I see it as a big problem if actually only 50 % will select grades and another 30 % select the topo grade even if they do not consider it as a personal confirmation of the grade.

They don't need to 'select' a grade. They only *might* suggest a (personal) grade, if they choose to. If they don't, they get the current scorecard ('8a topo') grade.
OffLine Lorenzo Cambria
  2018-03-26 18:53:49    
I have no personal experience of climbing such a grade (9a,9a+, etc) but the grades are a lot different (soft/hard) depending where you climb a 6b in Mouries is probably as hard as a 7a in El Chorro. Same for Buoux compared to Chulilia. And even in the same crag you find some hard 7a and easy 7a.

Who can really tell the difference between a 6c+ and a 7a ??? I have climbed a lot of 6c+ that are way harder than some 7a. Same thing for 7b,7c,8a etc.. So I guess there is no difference with 8c+ and 9a.

On the top of that you hear comment like "it fit my style", "i'm in a pretty good shape" "perfect conditions" etc..

>The easiest way to predict down gradings are to check which routes are the most repeated

@Jens the fact that 20 or 30 climbers did the red point of a 9a doesn't means its an easy 9a. Everybody goes to Spain to climb in the winter. Its "the place to be" for sure there are more 9a ascent there then in Frankenjura where the wether is shit and cold. By the way there is 23 ascent of Action Direct. That doesn't make it a 9c+

Estado Critico is 9a in the guidebook then its 9a period. And even if Jon Cardwell and Matty Hong thinks it's 8c+ it's not a good reason to change the grade.

And as I sayed before who can tell the difference between 6c+/7a - 7c+/8a - 8c+/9a.
I finally who gives a fu... :)

I'm going to St Léger in a few days projecting a very hard 8a :)

Cheers
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-26 21:12:04    
Why do you think a old guidebook should be the bible of a grade? Possibly new sequences were found or a hold broke. It seems that a website can provide a better update in comparison to a five year old topo.

It is of course very important if Estado Critico is 9a or 8c+ as it is a route of historical importance due to Alex Megos onsight.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2018-03-27 16:59:13    
The history shows that we actually have been correct. It is important for us to not report fake news :)
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-27 21:03:11    
All 8c routes should 'feel' the same no matter where, Spain, Kalymnos, Leonido, Frankenjura, US, SA, Australia ... whatever. If they are not, it's time to up- or downgrade some routes or the whole areas.
And no, it should NOT be considered any climber who don't (want to) express it's opinion agree with the 'topo' grade.
OffLine Philippe Vaucher
  2018-03-27 22:16:58    
I agree with what Bojan said.
OffLine Bojan
  2018-03-29 09:54:14    
Li-How, you misunderstood. When I say 8c 'feels' the same all around the world, I of course DON'T mean that for any single climber all 8c routes feels equally hard/difficult. Every climber knows it's nonsense.

What I mean is 8c on average should feel the same. E.g. if you take one route in Spain and one in Frankenjura which both have consensus ('topo') grade 8c, and you ask 100 climbers from different countries around the globe to climb those two routes (they never climbed before and they don't know the topo grade) what you expect is on average (or median) grade of these two routes should be the same, i.e., both should have the average/median grade of 8c. If on the other hand 8c (topo) in route A in Spain has average of 8b and route B in Germany 9a, this means route A should be downgraded and route B should be upgraded.