GO TO GLOBAL SITE   se es us fr za it
de ca au no
at br ru ch
gb pl nl sk
Hem | Nyheter | Videos | Artiklar | Galleri | Klippor | Gyms | Sök - Tick List | Forum | Ranking | Blogs | Kontakt | Ny Medlem
Forum: SWE / Editorial / More zones are needed in bouldering Login in to contribute
More zones are needed in bouldering
OffLine 8a.nu
  2018-09-11 00:00:00    
The female boulder qualification in Innsbruck was yet another example showing that one more zone is needed in bouldering. In Group A's fourth Boulder you just needed to do one move to get the zone, which 38 out of 56 did. Some progressed in the next hard moves but as they could not top it their score was the same.

On Group B's fourth boulder, just Janja Garnbret got the zone as it was placed higher up and then she topped out. Similar situations also on other boulders with either a very simple zone or a zone that more or less automatically meant a top.

If there would have been two zones on each boulder it would have been more fair and also both the climbers as well as the spectators would have enjoyed the qualification more.
Click to Enlarge Picture
OffLine Arnoud Prinz
  2018-09-11 17:14:18    
Please stop this nonsense! You just replace this subject for 1001 time. The readers get tired from all the same stories.
OffLine Jens Larssen
  2018-09-11 17:24:01    
A new several coaches and athletes who think it would be great with at least two zones. Please explain why you do not think this would have been better in the qualification? Which would have been the down sides do you think in this specific case?
OffLine Arnoud Prinz
  2018-09-11 17:50:52    
First - 2 boulders with one crux. One has a low crux and the other higher crux. I am good in the first boulder, and you good in the second. Result. Me: 1 top and 1 zone. You: one top zero zone. So i win! But not because i am better!!!!
Second - It makes no fun to get more point. Better boulders make more fun.
Third - There is no need. When the boulders are fine, there is anough seperation in the ranking.
OffLine Arnoud Prinz
  2018-09-11 17:52:48    
And every time when the routsetting is not good. You come with this!!!! So please give it a rest.
OffLine Eddie Fowke
  2018-09-11 18:05:40    
Or they could keep one zone, and set boulder problems more suited to the field. If you watch the stream you'll see that most of the boulders were set to difficult for the field and the conditions.
Lots of factors can contribute to why the boulders ended up being to difficult... Fatigue from more climbers having done Lead as part of combined, unseasonably warm conditions etc.
Number of zones is irrelevant if the climbers are struggling to even establish.
OffLine Jens Larssen
  2018-09-11 18:57:05    
@ Eddie: The route setters of course already try to set problems suited to the field and the conditions, the best they can. This seems to be a to difficult task and two zones would partly solve this problem.

@ Arnoud: I do not understand your example as you base it on how it is already today, i.e. one top and one zone. A climber than progress further up the boulder is better.
OffLine Arnoud Prinz
  2018-09-12 11:33:06    
No the example is based on a extra zone. (2 zones and a top)
The boulder i dont top, i get the first easy zone.
The boulder you dont top, you got nothing. Because the crux is low.
OffLine Jens Larssen
  2018-09-12 11:49:05    
Then the setting was wrong which can of course happen.

The problem of today with unfair results is much more likely to happen.

A climber who just gets the first zones on two boulders in two attempts and then can not do one more move wins over a the person who does the zones in three attempts but then continue to the top but can not do the match. Such a situation is not fair and also very illogical for the spectators.
OffLine Arnoud Prinz
  2018-09-12 15:13:52    
No, the setting is not wrong. Only the crux on different place. That is normal! You want to fix a problem that dont exit, and you make it unfair.
I almost climb it...........than just climb it and dont cry.
OffLine Jens Larssen
  2018-09-12 16:10:41    
Please explain why you think it is fair that a climber that just makes the zone does score the same as another climber who progress several moves but can not match the Top?
OffLine John Render
  2018-09-12 18:50:47    
@ Jens, I take it a step further even than you. I think scoring should first count tops, then total number of holds controlled. If you get higher you get a better score. That's how lead does it, and I believe boulder should do it similarly, after counting tops of course.
OffLine Jens Larssen
  2018-09-12 19:04:36    
I am afraid it is very hard to count holds on boulders and it is not fair as sometimes one boulder has seven moves meanwhile another just three :) It is also problematic as one big volume you can take in five different positions.

Anyhow I am glad you take it further meaning that my suggestions actually stands in between just one zone respectively counting holds :)
OffLine John Render
  2018-09-14 21:35:38    
@ Jens, Petra Klingler showed today why counting holds leads to better scoring. She went vastly further on the second boulder than everyone but Janja, making several extremely hard moves no one (besides Janja) could do.

But because she couldn't quite control the zone, she got no credit for her greater achievement. I've seen this happen many times in boulder comps, including WC events.

Lead constantly uses more and more boulder-type holds. Yet they are able to make an accurate count. I believe something similar can be done in boulder.

In lead, if you make it past a crux you often get several 'free' holds, i.e. moves that aren't so hard. In boulder that happens far less often: more typically you have to earn every move.

It seems ironic to me then that lead counts every hold, where boulder (where each move is usually much harder to get), does not.
OffLine Jens Larssen
  2018-09-14 21:47:54    
This final is another exemple that two zones are needed. It was remarkable to see that Petra did not score on the second boulder although she climbed much further. Another big mistake by the route setter.
OffLine Chalk Norris
  2018-09-15 11:00:08    
@John, you are exactly speaking what I questioned here many times before. With lead climbing every single movement counts, even the attempt to reach the next hold. With bouldering only zone and top.
Couldn't get a reasonable answer to that so far. It is much better to see for the judges.

@jens, you didnt't just try to tell me all lead routes have the same amount of holds?
Nothing easier than adding a factor that regulates that.