I have a suggestion, not so much about the grading system, but about the nomenclature. A lot of people (at least here in Spain, but not only Spanish speaking folk!) seem to think 'Second Go' means sending the route on the second try!!! Unless I am the one completely at loss here, I thought it meant the second time ever the route is made. Maybe it could be renamed to 'Second Ascent' or even 'First Repetition'... Another option is not to allow people to classify it as a Second Go when there are already 20 ascents of the route in the database! (See for example El Vagabundo in Cuenca, but there are soooooo many other examples). Perhaps people think it's unfair to miss the extra points of a flash or an OS because of a small slip, or whatever. Edit: I've just looked at the score for the 2nd Go, which I thoguht was a lot more, so this may seem a minor thing. In any case I believe it's not clear. That's my two cents. Cheers, -Manu
1. Go = 1. (personal) Attempt, 2. Go= 2.(personal) Attempt In France people often use 1. Go as "1.try after onsight attempt" which technically means 2. Try/Go/Attempt Second time a route is climbed: 2. ascent/1. repeat
Many things should be done on this great site, and I offer Jen my help but it seems that they don't want it. anyway I agree with dreamingof8a second go means personal try, not second time ascent. cheers- Nelson
To be honest, it is perfectly clear to the vast majority of people. "Unless I am the one completely at loss here, I thought it meant the second time ever the route is made. " - M Alva You were simply mistaken. "Second Go" means sending on your second try. This is the standard. Onsight- First try. (No beta.. obviously.) 2nd Go- Next try.
Not the most experienced on here, but sure it makes a lot more sense to read "second go" as "my second attempt on that route" rather than "second ascent ever of that route". As of late, I get the feeling that trying to quantify the time spent for a redpoint by the number of attempts seems a bit misleading. I think giving the number of days of "projecting" makes for a more accurate measurement of that time...
Aigh! My bad. I thought it meant second ascent ever because when you log a route 'Second Go' comes right after FA, whereas the choice between OS, flash, etc. is made on a completely different column. It seemed logical to me the other way around. Thanks for clarifying.
true. Would be way more logical to move it to that column imo. Is there any special reason why it is in the other one? btw: this enables people to log a route as onsight and second go at the same time (have seen that in the scorecard) which, of course, is really nonsense...
Yeah it would make more sense to have 2nd go in the same column as OS, flash etc. It still doesn't reveal much about how much work went into the route. Also does it mean the second time you leave the ground or the second redpoint attempt? There could be days of work in between trying an onsight and finally redpointing it, something that is not revealed by the present method of logging an ascent but which would be really useful to know when chosing projects and comparing how others have found the route.
@jaap: the rationale behind this is, that when redpointing a project you may have had numerous work-out sessions and then maybe you can climb it on first try (does not equal on sight!). Fair enough... So, when the french try to on-sight something and fail, they turn this on-sight attempt into a work-out session... thus the first try after the work-out session is "1st essais" :-)
Confusion about Second Go!