The 6c refers to the technical grade Jens. So as the route in question was before the drilling a 6c would be an poor protectable E8. now post drilling 6c falls neatly into a very safe E6. Jens can you please stop criticizing UKC and British Trad grades when you clearly dont konw what your talking about. i would of thought by now with all the slandering you have been giving british Trad grading you would of learnt a thing or two by now, but clearly not.
I am afraid that you are wrong. Nic is NOT talking about the technical grade when he says 6c as he has put a big F in front, meaning that he refers to the French grade, " The climbing was only F6c..." So please explain to me how a very safe 6c can get a E6 grade? And why did a 6c climb get a headline in the first place.
@ Ethan: If sombody is criticising me and spread false information, of course I have to answer. "In the first place", refers to when it was published as an E8, when the first ascent was done. Now, of course the news relates to the drilling. You just miss-understood me.
it was 6c E8, not a 6c. those are two completely different things. next to that, as far as I can see UKC just posted this news (about the drilling). an international climbing magazine apparently thought the original ascent was news-worthy, not UKC. and I mister-understand you perfectly. you don't get it, clear as day. the real truth is that this yet another personal attack by UKC! and if you don't reply to this post, I'll assume you agree with me :)
Jens: "In the first place", refers to when it was published as an E8, when the first ascent was done. I'm fairly sure, though, the grade reported after the FA was E8 6b/c (where 6b/c, certainly is the brittish technical grade). E8 is fairly high level, so news-worthy, at least locally. I also think it said the route was considerd one of the "last great problems", which adds to that. I'm in agreement though, that the article doesn't make sense where Nic Sellers says "feeling the grade to be nearer E6, perhaps 7, depending on how loose you thought the rock was. The climbing was only F6c but the rock rather loose and friable." On one hand it would make sense if he meant 6c (as in brittish tech grade), but then the remark, "[it] was only 6c", is kinda weird, since the original grade was 6b/c. I don't know. Should ask the article author I suppose before drawing any conclusions.
I think Jens is trying to attract sponsors or perhaps a buyer for the site. He constantly posts 8a.nu growth numbers (the ONLY site on the internet I've ever seen that advertises it's traffic numbers publicly) and he posts things like this because it attracts a lot of attention and gets a lot of hits. Courting controversy is seemingly good business for him (albeit shameless) This of course is my perception/opinion, but I don't think I'm very far off.
FAO JENS E8 Now E6 UKC Artical