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 / News / Is Duel the future for the Olympics? Login in to contribute
Is Duel the future for the Olympics?
OffLine 8a.nu
  2012-08-14 00:00:00    
OffLine Balázs Rau
  2012-08-14 23:52:00    
Hope not. They climbed ugly. Climbing is not about speed.
OffLine Lode Dubois
  2012-08-15 00:08:00    
this is just stupid, thomas is struggling with QD's, the climbing is to easy so the QD's determine the winner... 
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2012-08-15 00:26:12    
I totally agree that to climb a 7c route like this is not the future. On the other hand, it is very hard to make the current format exciting for the spectators. Sometimes it is just perfect if the route setters are lucky but in almost half the cases the routes are either to hard or to easy. One alternative would be to make a duel like this in the 8b region for the male in order to make it more interesting for the spectators. Another possivility is of course to make the normal lead routes like 8b+ and if there are several top outs, the time can decide. I perfectely understand that this is not what most competitors would like to see. My perspective is only based on what could be most interesting for non-climbers watching it in the Olympics.
OffLine random climber
  2012-08-15 02:36:45    
why would you change the basis of a sport for people who don't do it? some people have more static, slow and thoughtful styles of climbing. that doesn't make them worse climbers and certainly shouldn't change the outcome. Maybe some forms of climbing just aren't meant for uneducated spectators and there's nothing wrong with that. but I can't imagine changing the essence of a sport so people who don't really understand or appreciate it can find it interesting enough to watch. would you design race-cars in the form of dinosaurs or make fighters wear costumes just to make it more interesting..? no, that's ridiculous and so is putting difficulty-based climbing on a stop-watch.  I realize lead climbing competitions produce frequent draws and sometimes setting suits some styles better than others. but that's why there's a lead series. perhaps there could be some sort of olympic series to determine who medals instead of the standard setup in which the final counts for everything. but hard speed-climing is still speed-climbing
OffLine Jens1
  2012-08-15 07:30:21    
I agree with you Mr. Larssen.  It is very hard to make the current format exciting for the spectators.  Even though I will not be competing in a future Olympics, I think we are in a critical period in which we must find a way to take a snapshot of our sport for the world stage.  We can't throw aside the fundamentals of the sport such as pacing and shaking out, but we must find something that will work. -Jens
OffLine Some body
  2012-08-15 08:23:22    
I'm totally agreeing with you, March!! Why change a sport for people that are not really interested in it? Wouldn't it be better to optimize it for the people who love it, then to make it acceptable for the big crowds? I mean, come on, you can't really tell that everyone understands every detail of the judgements of jurys in sports like synchronized swimming or gymnastics, or that everyone knows every detailed basketball rule, so why does everything in the climbing competitions has to be understandable for every non-climber? I think the most important thing is that you have competitions that line out who's the best CLIMBER, and not who's the best in doing this special competition-format. We have to adjust the competitions to the sport we love, not to adjust the sport to competitions other could possibly understand, if we want to determine the best lead-climber! During watching the olympics in london I thought very often how invalid all the arguments against climbing in the olympics are, because there are many sports that are hard to understand, boring to watch if you aren't into it, or can stretch the time limit very hard. To change our competitions would not help to get olympic, cause as they are they would already fit. Climbing is just not well known enough, that's the only hindrance. If it's well known enough to make money with, THAT's the point it will be accepted by the olympic comitee. No real matter of the format. So please please stop making competitions ugly and licking feet of some olympic commitee on cost of the sport itself!! Or am I totally on the wrong way??
OffLine Some body
  2012-08-15 08:26:07    
and to add one more thing: I already enjoy the competitions as they are (wow who'd have thought that after my last post^^) and, Jens1, I also find them exciting if the routesetting isn't too unlucky! =)
OffLine mr. monkey
  2012-08-15 08:31:22    
You think the people that do this sport should start shooting from the hip, playing techomusic or shoot gangster style to make it more exciting? The prob. is`nt making climbing more exiting, you just need more people to be doing it and understanding it. And whats the big deal with getting to the olimpics anyway? Stop the nonsense..  In the vid. they climb terrible, and its just stupid to watch the worlds best climbers climbing like shit. 
OffLine User Deactivated
  2012-08-15 09:05:56    
Where does it come from that climbing is boring to watch and that the format as it was per 2011 is boring? Compared to all other sports I've watched during the London Olympics, I don't see at all why climbing shouldn't be one of the naturally most exciting sports you can watch and one of the most comprehensible (and especially exciting) for people who don't do it. If anything should be changed, mustn't it be how climbing is organized, and rather the route setting and commentating in the comps than the format? I very strongly disagree with you, Jens, and get the feeling that you're not being true neither to climbing as a sport (pretty obvious) nor the climbing community or your readers, but I respect your argument.
OnLine Jens Larssen
  2012-08-15 09:41:33    
I do absolutely NOT do think that Duel like it is shown in the video is a possible future for the Olympics. I guess most who see this video will think it would not be nice in the long run even if watching a final like this can be fun. On the other hand, many find some competitions boring to watch like the last world champion final for the female where all but one fell on the same move. The history shows that the route setting problems have actually increased at least for the female. The reason for this is of course that more climbers are equally good and that it is, because of this, very hard to separate them.  The IFSC are of course aware of the problems and this year they are trying some new rules. I think they have made nice progress this year with adding time and digital results on the screen. This is very good but the question is if it is enough and further more most competitors do not like the new rules.  What are your ideas to make it even more exciting? It is easy to criticize but much harder to give some new ideas :) 
OffLine Miha
  2012-08-15 09:41:42    
All can be much better and also interesting if they only sort out the route setting. There's no real dynamics, no ideas. Just trow some holds on the wall and make it a 65 moves route. I watched the Imst women finals and got so bored after 30 min that I rather went and watched TV. sorry
OffLine finbarrr
  2012-08-15 10:06:20    
Neither speed nor duel can be the future of lead climbing, easy as that. There is a big misunderstanding at the base of all this "Excitement" talk: Sports are said to be "exciting" when the spectator cares about who wins!!! That can be influenced by many factors: nationality (cities when you think about national football etc.) , prize/money rewards, media-hype or just friendship ( if you personally know the athlete, or think you do because of media exposure). It is normal that you don't find lead climbing interesting if you don't really care who wins, "it was probably the best climber, right?" But i haven't been to a lead climbing contest where the spectators (who usually know some of the climbers) did not enjoy themselves. And as has been said before, MANY olympic sports are NOT exciting, if you just look at the "action". It is all about the accumulation of scores or times leading up to a "grand finale": - shooting (guns, rifles, bows) - 10.000 meters - surfing, sailing - CURLING Some sports are even worse, and don't have a winner until X times 90 minutes are played out, sometimes without a goal for many hours, spread out over most of the year.To me that is the epitome of boring, but you will find people who find it exciting ;)
OffLine finbarrr
  2012-08-15 10:38:03    
one possible way to make for instance the final quicker, is to change the format a little bit:  "five" finalists an extra wide wall five completely identical routes, but really hard, guaranteed fall. starting at the same time just count the top hold they reach, no time-crap. it should be possible to build a wall like this for special events, seeing they build 2000 meter rowing "pools"
OffLine Alex G
  2012-08-15 12:35:16    
Seeing them rushing through the route makes me feel sick. It's dangerous! What if they fall at the 3rd clip? There is a lot of slag... once we see the first grounder from 6m we will not see any duel again.
OffLine Franz the Stampede
  2012-08-15 14:35:14    
I agree with Frank Moeller and people along his lines. There's are heaps of impossibly, incredibly boring sports that are already part of the Olympics. They haven't changed them for the sake of the laymen in the audience. I don't see why they should change climbing. I don't see how is the "but it's exciting for people to watch" thing that dignifies and qualifies a sport. 
OffLine Wan "Short Round" Li
  2012-08-15 18:30:39    
Skiing is a mountain sport, but they have crazy events in the Olympics that don't relate to the activity at all. Long distance jumping and alpine racing don't relate to you being a great mountain skiier, and I don't believe I seem people working on that at the resorts too often. Still they are great spectator events and in the Olympics.  It seems that if you want climbing to be an Olympic sport, then maybe you have to accept it being a little bit silly in its format. BTW it seems the other events (Wushu, Rugby, Squash, Wakeboard, Roller Sports, Karate, Baseball, Softball) competing for the one new event spot may be more likely to win by sheer mainstream popularity.
OffLine Carlos Lugo
  2012-08-15 19:35:31    
" On the other hand, it is very hard to make the current format exciting for the spectators. Sometimes it is just perfect if the route setters are lucky but in almost half the cases the routes are either to hard or to easy. " - Jens There is already a World Championship format in climbing.  All of the (real) Olympic sports also have World Championships:  Cycling, gymnastics, track and field, swimming, soccer/football, volleyball, tennis... None of them invent weird wacky formats for the Olympics.  In fact, the only things that makes the Olympics different from the WC in those sports is the increased viewership, a slight increase in participating nations during qualifying rounds, and the fact that it happens every fourth year. WHY do you insist on speculating as to what format climbing should use if the IOC selects the sport? It's apparent that the IOC and IFSC would (or at least should) stick to the existing World Championship format of speed/boulder/difficulty(lead)... JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER SPORT IN THE WORLD DOES WITH THE OLYMPICS. Inventing a new format just turns the idea of Olympic climbing into an illegitimate sport and increases the chances of it being dropped in favor of sports that use the Olympics as an actual World Championship.  The Olympics isn't about altering the sport for the spectators, it's about hosting a diverse series of World Championships every four years on the global stage. That's it. Period.
OffLine Balázs Rau
  2012-08-15 19:36:24    
There must be a technical or sport-diplomatic reason why there is no climbing in the Olympics. At the very least Bouldering could be added. It's pretty easy to follow, exciting and way more popular than half of the existing Olypmpic sports.
OffLine J.Gunn
  2012-08-15 21:05:27    
Is there not more progression (or a better case) made for bouldering? ... just sayin :P Otherwise, back on topic... Speed climbing will be super shit.  It feels like a lot of non-climbers who watch climbing relate it to 'speed and height' as this is quite often what their experiences have related to (sport highlights of speed-climbing, people making massive wall climbs etc etc). I would like to think little bit of education will make those who are genuinely interested in the Olympics probably understand and appreciate difficulty over speed (and distance.. lol).  This is quite often what the commentators of the Olympics currently try to do for most sports (especially those less common). They explain the current sport and what the athlete is trying to achieve. I mean... I've never done any competitive cycling in my life yet I still find it super entertaining, especially in the velodrome! My humble opinion, awaiting a downgrade... :P
OffLine Josep M. Cedó
  2012-08-15 22:48:21    
You asked, "mr monkey" answered, nothing else to say.
OffLine Zenon Marski
  2012-08-16 01:40:24    
"What are your ideas to make it even more exciting? ...." - Jens Obligatory bikini ..
OffLine roberto rinaldi
  2012-08-16 03:33:26    
no no no