Post on 23-Mar-2016
description
Share Report Abuse Next Blog» Create Blog Sign In
wednesday, march 3, 2010
Bouldering grades: Everything is average
nowadays
I decided to write down some of my thoughts on bouldering grades,
since a lot has been happening during the last years in the bouldering
world. This sort of conversation still seems to be some sort of a taboo in
the climbing community, so I am prepared to receive a lot of negative
reactions, but I feel like this is a really important topic to discuss.
I'm going to start from the beginning of this
whole mess. In the year 2000, 8C (V15) grade
first got introduced to bouldering, when Fred
Nicole did the first ascent of Dreamtime and
proposed a never before seen grade of 8C for it.
Soon it became known as the standard for 8C in
the climbing media. That was 10 years ago. Still
to this date, most of the cutting-edge boulders
being put up are 8C. To most, this means that a
decade passed and we have not progressed at
all.
Sometimes things are not how seem. There has
been huge progression difficulty-wise in bouldering. What happened is
deflation in the grading scale. Dreamtime being set as the 8C standard
(by the media), other hard problems are being put up and since
Dreamtime is the 8C standard (and the only problem of that grade in
the world) they get graded based on Dreamtime. New Base Line gets it's
first ascent and marks the upper end of 8C. Time goes by, more hard
problems get put up and graded based on these standards. And then,
BOOOM! After Dreamtime gets enough repeats, turns out it is actually
not 8C, but only 8B+. Same thing with New Base Line, which marked
the upper end of 8C, it turns out to be 8B+ also. This is were it all
started to go wrong.
Dreamtime, the problem that started it all.
In 2005 Dave Graham makes the first ascent of The Story Of Two
Worlds and decides to call it the new standard for 8C, even though he
could have proposed 8C+ as it was harder for him than anything else at
links:
blog archive ▼ 2010 (5)
▼ March (2)
Bouldering grades: Everything
is average nowadays
CORE Trailer
► February (1)
► January (2)
► 2009 (35)
► 2008 (2)
subscribe
Nalle Hukkataival
Create Your Badge
contact me:
videos:
Comments
Posts
the time. Instead, Dave chose to use it as the 8C standard and make
some sense to the chaotic grading scale. Today, there is a lot of variety
in the upper-scale grades, simply based on these double standards,
because some problems are still graded based on the old standard,
while other problems are more reliant on Dave's standard.
Story of Two Worlds, in Cresciano, Switzerland
I have repeated at least five boulder problems that were originally
graded 8C or even 8C+, and have now been downgraded by a grade or
two. And the list goes on. Actually, most of the proposed 8C's or 8C+'s
have been downgraded and many of the ones that have not, are still
unconfirmed. The issue here is that a few people (like me and Dave
Graham for instance) are still trying to define the 8C grade (which I
personally think is still the cutting edge) while rest of the climbers do not
necessarily realize the the grade deflation, that has been going on for
some years now.
Here are a few examples:
- Dreamtime downgraded from 8C to 8B+
- New Base Line 8C (hard), downgraded to 8B+
- The Never-ending Story in Magic Wood was originally called 8C+, now
downgraded to 8B+
- El Techo de los Tres B's, downgraded from 8C to 8B
- Banshousha, supposedly the hardest slab in the world - downgraded
from 8C to 8B
- Memento, downgraded from 8C+ to 8B+ (and according to many still
deserves a downgrade)
- Amandla, downgraded from 8C+ to 8B+
- Terremer in Hueco Tanks, downgraded from 8C+ to (soft?) 8C
- Ode to the modern man, downgraded from 8C to soft 8B+
- Kheops assis, downgraded from 8C to 8B+
and the list goes on...
I see this
trend
repeating
itself year
after year
and there
seems to be
no end to it.
Why do so
many
problems
keep getting downgraded? Why are so many problems overgraded in
the first place? The media is adding pressure for professional climbers
to strive for new grades, since bouldering grades have been stalling or
even on the decline for years. An 8C first ascent is not necessarily that
newsworthy anymore, after all that grade was climbed already 10 years
ago.
Last June I did the first ascent of
Livin' Large in South Africa. It is
by far the hardest boulder I've
climbed so far, a lot harder than
any 8C that I have climbed in the
past. Does that mean that it is
8C+? Maybe, just maybe. Does
that mean that I should grade it
8C+? I don't think so. Why do we
always have to shoot high first
and then wait for the downgrade.
Why is it never the other way
Could Be Worse
Nalle Hukkataival Ninja Skills (8B+) FA
PURE - A Bouldering Flick by Chuck Fryberger OFFICIAL TRAILER
ROCKLANDS: Black Diamond Climber Nalle Hukkataival visits South Africa's famed boulders
Nalle Hukkataival bouldering in Maltatal
around? I graded it 8C because I
feel certain that it is at least 8C.
If other people feel like it's
harder, they can upgrade it. Why
do people always choose the
egotistical approach to these
things instead of "playing it safe"?
Furthermore, I think Livin' Large equals in difficulty with The Story of
Two Worlds, the stiff standard set by Dave Graham back in 2005,
defining the standard further.
The previous standards failed us and sent the highest grades to a down-
ward spiral. This time we tried to set standards that are very likely to
hold their grade. A solid foundation for the grade is what we need to
correct the situation and that also means lots of downgrades. This is
where it gets hard, because often people can take it personal, when
their biggest pride gets downrated. The few people who actually put
themselves on the line and try to make a change for better, get a bad
name for criticising other people's ascents or more precisely the grades.
Grading climbs based on the new-school standard can mean getting "left
behind" so to speak. In the world of professional climbing, that can be a
big risk to take.
It is too easy to keep
quiet and go with the
flow, but where will
this lead us in a few
years? Already, the
grading scale is so
chaotic in the upper
end, that sometimes
I'm not sure if it's
even salvageable
anymore, especially if
we start basing an
entirely new grade on
the "standard" set
right now.
Like I said before,
there are not many
people out there trying
to fix the current situation, before jumping to a new grade. If others do
not approve on this standard that we are trying to set and grade things
based on a slightly different scale, that's totally fine with me, but in that
case our problems need to be potentially re-graded. Who sets the
grading scale, is the question here. I totally agree, that we need to
move up on the scale soon, but I'm not sure if the necessary (big) step
has been reached yet and further do we want to base a new grade on
such a chaotic "foundation".
The fact is, that there is still no clear standard for 8C. We can all be
throwingout big grades and flashy numbers and get on magazine
covers, get better sponsorship and then a few months later watch our
problem getting downgraded. The irony here is that a downgrade rarely
makes the news and one would not necessarily get discredited for what
he claims to have done.
I see lists of
the hardest
boulders in
the world
and in reality
there is a
three grades
alternation
between different problems, all categorized under the same grade. This
almost makes me want to start a new grading scale. Another important
thing is, that grades should be openly discussed, not kept quiet.
Although, most grade related conversations on internet forums are
usually quite pointless, I think there are people who are in certain
situations qualified to state their opinion about a grade, without
necessarily completing a climb.
In
conclusion,
grades are
only
estimates,
personal
opinions of
the difficulty
of a climb.
People make
mistakes,
that is how it
will always
be. But how does it happen that 99 percent of the time, the mistake
happens to be giving a HIGHER grade, very very rarely lower.
Especially with upper-scale boulder problems, comes a fair amount of
responsibility with the grading, because when the problem becomes a
standard of some sort, a test-piece, it can and will affect the grading of
many other climbs.
Grades are only a very small and quite unimportant part of climbing, but
why do we even bother with the grades, if they really mean nothing?
sreen grabs: www.8a.nu
posted by nalle hukkataival at 7:48 pm labels: 8c, bouldering, grades, v15
68 comments:
rudi said...
which boulder is a real 8c in your oppinion then?
3/3/10 20:22
zach said...
Great to read something about grades from someone who
knows what they're talking about. Very well written!
3/3/10 20:27
anonymous said...
Very well written. Thanks for opening a great debate.
3/3/10 21:33
justin said...
I'm glad you were willing to voice your well thought out opinion.
Thanks for sharing.
3/3/10 22:08
anonymous said...
Well written, it was needed. There is a huge variation of grading
at the upper scale, especially soft touch places like magic wood
and cresciano . . By the way when are some of you top boys
going to try John Gaskins stuff? Maybe not the prettiest lines but
if you want to find difficulty...
3/3/10 22:10
nm said...
Nalle,
Props for tackling this issue bravely and progressively. Much
respect.
NM
3/3/10 22:20
nalle hukkataival said...
Thanks for all the positive responses.
The Story of Two Worlds is a good standard in my opinion. Even
though it's still unrepeated, I've tried it enough to get a good
understanding of the difficulty. In my opinion there are certainly
other 8C's out there too, but not nearly as many as has
originally been claimed.
I am very interested to try Gaskins' problems, even though I'm
aware they are not the most aesthetic boulders out there.
Hopefully I can find the time at some point.
I think we all agree that grades in the end are not very
important for climbing, but still I hope this discussion will help to
make some much needed changes in the grading system.
One person that I forgot to credit in my post is Fred Nicole. He
has climbed countless groundbreaking first ascents and some of
them got downgraded, but many of his hard boulder problems
are still unrepeated and some without a doubt deserve an
upgrade. Monkey Wedding to name one, a problem that he
graded 8B+ and most likely deserves an upgrade to 8C.
3/3/10 23:18
climbing islove said...
Nalle, what a great essay! I really agree with your argument.
Keep up the good climbing, as well as the conservative grading!
As you say, far too few "play it safe" and go with a solid,
conservative grade. You've pointed out the trouble this causes
at the upper end of the grading scale. I don't personally climb at
that upper end, but I can tell you it causes the same problems
lower in the scale, from even the very bottom end. As the upper
end climbs higher and higher, people assume the lower grades,
or "steps", should be easier and easier. From V2 to V15, every
level ends up getting watered down. What was V5 is now
supposedly V8, all in the name of "progression."
People's egotistical hunger for progress blinds them to the trick
they play on themselves: to think you climb at a higher level,
when you actually don't.
It makes me nostalgic for the John Gill B-scale, but that's
another discussion perhaps...
3/3/10 23:27
anonymous said...
Well said, man. Thanks for stepping in as the voice of reason,
Nalle. If The Story of Two Worlds and Livin' Large are the
standard for 8C, then what does that mean for the standard for
8B, 8B+, or easier grades? Is there one?
3/3/10 23:33
david said...
Hey Nalle!
I really like the new openness of high-end boulderers regarding
the grade inflation! I think this will help our sport immensely!
Perhaps we should just gather everyone climbing >8B and lock
them up in a room until we have a solution ;-)
thanks for your post,
David
3/3/10 23:52
chri said...
probably the best thing written concerning the subject in a very
long time...not just a well thought out opinion but also an
excellent piece of writing. if only there were more intelligent
voices like this!
3/3/10 23:56
anonymous said...
I don't really understand the point. In the beginning you say that
Dreamtime is 8c and after a while it gets downgraded because it
has many repeats and there are some harder Boulders that are
rated 8c as well. Doesn't make sense for me the question is if it
is harder than the 8b+ Boulders established before and if yes
the grade should stay and it should be the standard for 8c and
everything harder should be 8c+ or 8c/+ if you don't think it is
abig step. This theory to make always harder 8c Boulders
reminds me at the thinking in the alpine climbin where they said
that there is no route harder than UIAA 6. So open your mind
and establish the seventh grade or 8c+ grade or whatever if you
truly belive that it is harder.
greets Tom
4/3/10 00:14
sakari mcgregor said...
Finally someone writes a well written essay about the topic, and
not some two sentence paragraph. nicely done mate
4/3/10 00:15
dom said...
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Nalle, very interesting reading.
It reminds me of the comments Malcolm Smith made a few
years ago after he repeated Dreamtime called it low end 8B+
and claimed that 8C does not yet exist.
4/3/10 00:17
nalle hukkataival said...
The standard for 8B+? Off the top of my head,
Midnight Express in Boulder Canyon, ironically New Base Line in
Switzerland and possibly Amandla in South Africa. Maybe Ninja
Skills in Switzerland, but it hasn't been tried by many people yet.
8B has already been standardized pretty well in my opinion.
Some good examples that I can think of: Mithril in Switzerland,
Nagual in Hueco, Sunseeker in Mt. Evans, Vecchia Leone in
Switzerland, Top Notch in RMNP, Banshousha in Japan, The
Power of Goodbye in Austria...
These are my own views and by no means do I want to become
any kind of grade police here. I just wanted to start a
conversation on the matter. It's obvious that people's opinions
differ, but I think we can still make the grading scale much more
logical than what it is at the moment.
4/3/10 00:23
macca said...
Hi Nalle,
Nice post, interesting to hear your point of view which seems to
be one that is also shared by Dave Graham. I think bouldering
grades are always going to be a lot harder to grade than
straight up routes given they are generally short problems and
often better suit some people more than others. I have a couple
of quick questions:
1. don't you think it makes it difficult to progress the grade if
you are conservative all the time? By suggesting a new grade
the problem and climber gets publicity, but this also means
others will come to try it and offer their opinion. I think it is
often easier to suggest a downgrade rather than an upgrade,
particularly if no one knows what the next level / grade should
feel like.
2. If Dave Graham put up the Story of Two Worlds in 2005 and
it hasn't seen a repeat (it has seen quite a few attempts), would
that not suggest it is in fact harder than any other V15
proposed? I know this has been suggested many times before,
but still a fair argument. Perhaps it will get an upgrade when it
does get a repeat :)
4/3/10 00:32
nalle hukkataival said...
Tom, the thing is Dreamtime turned out not to be harder than
other 8b+'s at the time after all. The problem was Dreamtime
being hyped by the media as the first 8C and the standard for
the grade. For some reason it took 4 years to get downgraded
to 8B+ (which it deserved). That 4 years and those new
boulders that got put up and graded during that time is what led
to the current situation.
4/3/10 00:47
anonymous said...
personally, doing a first ascent always makes the problem seem
more difficult to me. i like to grade it what i think it is, and then
drop a grade. so if i think its a v8, then ill say its v7, and it
should generally be solid. it is hard to make a new grade,
especially since other people often use different beta that may
be better, and there are different styles. i think that if a problem
is exactly your style and it is still the hardest thing youve ever
done, you could probably say that its a grade up, or half a
grade. but if its your anti-style, then you have to remember that
there are other people who will probably say that it is soft. i feel
like its almost MORE satisfying to climb a hard v8 than a soft 9,
because a soft 9 could be more like a 7 or even lower. also, the
region that you are tends to make a large difference, hueco
seems about a 1/2 grade softer than bishop, and bishop already
seems soft. i do feel that the upper level climbers should either
give a grade range, with the grade they think the climb is at the
top, and a lower grade for what it might be, since it is all
subjective. either way, the best climbers have to set the
standard and not inflate it or well be having v18's that should be
hard v15's, etc.
interesting article, thanks for the input
4/3/10 01:01
anonymous said...
Very well written and of course I totally agree on everything you
say. I have been fighting with the same issues for many years :-
) You make a strong role model in the climbing community.
Jens Larssen/www.8a.nu
4/3/10 01:02
addi said...
Great post! I'm really glad you open up and talk about that. This
attitude of "i don't want to think about the grades, I just want to
climb" is really most of the time not genuine and most climbers
think about the grade a lot. It's because we're trying to improve
and better ourselves.
This tendency to never upgrade a problem, but only downgrade
is a highly psychological one. When you're trying something
really hard, you always feel that it's a higher grade than when
you've actually completed the climb.
It's a matter of putting your heart, your pride out there and
saying "this is the best I can do" and then letting other people
basically "judge" you based on what you feel that the grade is.
Nobody would want to upgrade a problem because then you get
into the though process of "If that other climber thinks this is a
V12 and I really feel that it's a V14 and I say that, then I'm
basically saying I find the problem harder than he does. I then,
seem like a weaker climber."
It seems silly when you put it like this, but this could be a strong
factor in this mentality of never upgrading a problem and always
downgrading.
Also, if a few people talking about downgrading a problem and
you don't feel it should be downgraded, then if you say so,
you're telling them that you think the problem feels harder than
the other two do. Then you're making yourself a "weaker
outsider"
4/3/10 01:12
nicolas mathieu said...
but I think something that's also coming in consideration about
the constant downgrading of the problem is that everybody have
different style, so, for some, an 8b, will be 8c, and for others it
will be 8a so.... like if you are short, you could but a super hard
problem for you like 8b+ but then someone super tall would
come and skip all the moves, or someone stronger on this style,
and I think that's also the origine of this downgrading ==>
exemple fontainbleau ==> lots of frequentation, so if a lots of
people are climbing the problem, they are more downgraded
because there is alltime someone who is more adapted for this
style . and it's for this than usually, the grade are easier in new
areas ...
nico
4/3/10 01:16
nalle hukkataival said...
Good points everyone. I'm not claiming to have all the answers
to this, I'm merely pointing out the problem and bringing it to
people's attention. Maybe through the conversation we can find
a solution that is going to change things for better.
4/3/10 01:35
marc germani said...
That's a really brave and great comment Nalle. And i think there
should be a committee to set grades standards. This committee
will consist of world class climbers that are not afraid of hurting
other climbers egos hahaha.
Nalle, 2 days ago i decided to start my own grading system. But
i was thinking about it long time before what happened lately. As
i am almost the only guy bouldering in my whole country, and
all i do is projects, i decided to start my MG grading system. It
might be a funny thing for others, but it really help me, and
after some time of thinking about it, i found out it was really
accurate. The grade is very very personal, related to my own
view of the difficulty.
i don't want to wait for climbers to come from other countries
and to hit me with a number, that if they know what they are
saying, i am developing my own grading system, and later,
when i get more experienced after some travels, or help with
real professionals like you and Dave, i will put a conversion
table to what i already established.
you may read more on my blog
http://boulderinglebanon.wordpress.com/
Marc Germani
4/3/10 02:15
anonymous said...
I think grades are basically a mess all through the scale from
v0 - v15. The reason for this mess is that we all have unique
strengths. These strengths vary from extreme crimping ability to
compression, etc. I find it rare that climbers are equal in these
abilities. Example a crimpy v10 could be hard or almost
impossible for a v11 climber who is good at compression and
slopers, where the same v10 will be very attainable for v9
climber with strong fingers. You mentioned Amandla v15 by
Fred, he said the crux was the hardest move he had ever done.
That is saying a lot from him. He spent years to do this line.
Then Paul sends it in one session, calls it v14. Understandable
for sure. My point is grading could only be truly accurate if we
all had the same physique, the same strengths, height, weight,
tendons etc. I think it is very important to grade something you
truly feel it deserves, trying to second guess everybody else is
crazy. I really admire Fred for establishing so many problems
and always giving the grade he believes it deserves. It is Fred
that truly has pushed the standards all these years, the rest
have barely caught up. I have heard the mushroom roof v8 is
soft for the grade, what these people don't realize that
mushroom roof at v8 set the standard for v8. Then again John
Sherman invented the v-scale. That says a lot for our sport, ha
ha, jk. No doubt's we all take the grades a little to seriously.
Sandbaggers are just as bad as the inflaters. Brave and humble,
more like prideful and egocentric. Basically boulder problems
will feel different to different climbers. There iare just too many
factors. If the rocklands where situated in the west desert of the
US, everything would be a few grades lower due to dryer and
colder conditions. Grades are retarded, but most of us have a
love affair with them.
4/3/10 02:22
nalle hukkataival said...
@Macca
Being conservative with the grades surely conflicts with
progressing the grade, but I believe we need some of logical
standard for 8C before putting up 8C+'s, unless something is
clearly a big step above the rest.
Suggesting upgrades happens very rarely and I think that is one
thing that needs to change. One reason why no-one ever
upgrades anything is simply, that there are not many problems
out there that deserve an upgrade. Also, we do not want to go
overboard with the downgrading, just what is necessary to reach
some sort of logical scale.
Dave has a lot of experience with grades and in his opinion
Story of Two Worlds is high-end 8C, as high as 8C gets before
becoming 8C+. Just like any grade, 8C has a range and Story of
Two Worlds in Dave's opinion marks the upper end of 8C. I
suppose it is possible that it could get upgraded when repeated,
depending on how the grades evolve.
4/3/10 03:13
john f said...
Cool post! When you mentioned "Maybe through the
conversation we can find a solution that is going to change
things for better." I think I saw a pretty good group of folks on
Daila's blog sitting at a cafe drinking beer that could start
making that decision! :D
4/3/10 03:36
anonymous said...
i think you and dave are just jealous cause daniel is getting all
the focus lately and people are calling him as the best boulderer
in the world!
4/3/10 03:54
anonymous said...
Hey Nalle,
Very interesting to hear the opinions of the top climbers on
grading, a well written post for sure.
I don't climb at the hard end of the scale myself, but I can see
what is being talked about in the grades that i do climb, as there
seems to be huge variations in the difficulty of the problems I
have climbed/am currently trying whilst being the same grade.
My thought on the grading is that perhaps trying to decide what
is the standards at the very top are and working backwards is
perhaps the wrong way round? As you said, 8B is a grade which
seems to be solidly defined by certain test pieces of this grade.
Perhaps by working upward from these 8B's, setting them as
the 'hard standard' (not the hardest mind!) and grading
problems in relation right up through to the upper grades would
resolve the problem (at least on the upper end of scale)? By
starting at the 'beginning' as such (8B for this case), all the
above grades can be accurately graded. This may mean that
the 'bench mark' 8C problems suggested end up as harder, the
same, or softer, but then their grades will be in accordance with
the lower grade agreed 'bench marks' i.e. those 8B problems
listed. After all, the best place to start is always the beginning,
not the end.
Sorry this turned into a bit of an essay (and probably a bit of a
confusing one). Hopefully this is a bit more of an objective view
as I have no idea what these problems feel like in difficulty.
Thanks for bearing with me.
Paul H
4/3/10 04:00
nick.brown200 said...
Psyched to see you try some Gaskins problems. Us Brits have
been waiting a while to see some worthy attention shown to the
demi-gods boulders.
4/3/10 04:33
anonymous said...
Good article Nalle, it now makes sense exactly why Dave was
pissed off with Daniel's V15 upgrade on Desperanza. Especially
since he considered personally that Espereranza was a soft V14,
adding a few V7 sit start moves to it would hardly qualify it as
the benchmark 8C you guys are trying to solidify.
I only climb about V6 in my local gym but I find there is
definitely more esteem attached to a soft V6 than a hard V4.
The two problems may be equally as physically challenging, but
everyone likes to brag about the big numbers :-)
Also, is there a video of Dave Graham doing 'a story of two
worlds' anywhere? Dosage maybe? Can't seem to find anything
about it on the net other than the grading controversy. I would
love to see it (or the dagger) climbed.
4/3/10 05:01
anonymous said...
These lines are what they are. It really doesn't matter if we call
them v16 or v14, what they truly are will never change unless
the rock changes.
4/3/10 06:21
anonymous said...
Two thoughts:
- One downgrade doesn't change the consensus grade. If a
problem has two or three ascents with varying opinions, it might
not be settled just yet.
- Re: Dreamtime, it was pretty widely reported that it had
been "aggressively cleaned" early on and thus actually became
easier. Nalle or anyone else with real info on that?
4/3/10 08:53
anonymous said...
The fact that grading develops independently in each country
makes a world consensus extremely difficult. Take Britain as an
example, really conservative grading scale that feels just right
to them. From Ben and Jerry, to Malc and on to Gaskins, it's a
logical progression which works.....Until they go on holiday to
somewhere like magic wood and flash the same grade that may
take years in Britain. No opinion on which scale is the correct
one, just highlighting the differences between countries.
4/3/10 10:38
anonymous said...
Well in my opinion, this whole thing is a problem of you guys
climbing these grades... i mean there are not that many people
climbing these difficulties this is about. Actually you are kind of
a „community“ by yourself and should easily be able to share
about your business! So up in your highend grades you should
be able to come to one level! The problem is, that if the upper
end of the grading scale is not clearly defined, the whole grading
scale thing is kind of more fluid than solid (what it should be!).
You have the lower end and the upper end. Things in between
are relatives to these borders. Defining the lower end is pretty
easy and was done allready by alpine climbers long time ago.
This definition should be kept! As difficulties grow, the only thing
to do is to go up with numbers above the so far upper border!
No need to make things fit so far! But as you guys climb harder
and harder but try to keep the ultimate 8C border, things below
have to fit... sandbagging...
this is, why especially in popular crags, where you can find
many upper-end problems, lower difficulties get downgraded as
well. At the moment this seems to work and to be a solution to
the whole problem. But actually it isnt! We are all getting
stronger. But instead of saying „the maximum thing i can do is
moving towards higher levels“ you say „maximum is allready
reached, im moving toward this maximum/i have reached this
maximum“. So you try to fit a growing spectrum of difficulty into
an allready established interval (v0?-v16?). This without doubt
makes things inbetween the borders quite messy! At a point in
time, 7B will be so close to 7C and 7C so close to 8A, that many
many people arent any longer able to get the difference!
Espescially looking over an also growing spectrum of styles (of
the climbs and the climbers) and strenghts! Actually this is
allready happening (also in sportclimbing)! And as a
consequence things get messed up even more, because this
uncertanty produces more downgrading... this is stupid!
Practically, the stupidness is like this; in my „likely“-homecrag
(so you cant say its because its not my style or im not used to
it) cresciano i have to dig really deep to get a 7C or 7C+ done,
but in hueco im nearly able to flash it... this in fact (or is it me
thinking it?) is representative to my „theory“! In europe, things
happen like i described it. Downgreding everywhere. The only
one trying to progress (also in terms of grading) was kind of
bernd zangerl, who now seems blamed for overgrading. Take
US. Over there things go as they maybe should, with daniel
woods doing it right (do we know it is right???). Knowing
different v15, why not give v16 to something feeling harder? As
you know, when something really feels harder, it is!!! otherwise
you dont get the feeling, or you are uncertain about it.
4/3/10 10:41
anonymous said...
Hey Nalle
Why don't bouldering grades get a combined grading system,
like an 8C B3, for a first ascender grading it 8C. I think
something like combining it with the Gill grading system.
Then maybe there isn’t so much discussion on it. And more
ascenders (and grade discussion) will grade it eventually
something like 8B B1.
Nice idea or already tried?
Tony
4/3/10 10:48
g said...
very interesting post and comments, grades might not be that
important but i somehow like the subject a lot :)
apart from the issue of setting a standard for each grade, in my
opinion another component of the grade discussion, maybe
more important at the lower and mid levels, is agreeing on the
meaning of "difficult".
I'll make it black-or-white with two extreme examples.
a)difficult is something most people will need to train hard for,
even if anyone has the potential to get it. A one arm pullup, or a
campus board sequence is an example. A fairly technical
problem with no real morpho move will be another.
b)difficult is something few people can repeat, even if
everybody trains hard as hell for years.
something that requires talents going beyond what we
call "training" : a certain body type (morpho stuff), a unique
mental strenght (dangerous or very aleatory),the ability/luck to
be there at the right time (extremely conditions-dependent
problems in areas with shitty/unpredictable conditions year
round...), etc...
if difficult is case "a" you will give a high grade to a problem that
generally requires a lot of fitness or attempts, even if it sees a
lot of repetitions.
if difficult is case "b" you will give a high grade to things that
don't see a lot of success (much like the bachar scale?), even if
odd repeats (too fast or from "too weak" people) happen.
so what's the opinions here, if you were forced to choose an
extreme and let the other go, a) or b)?
4/3/10 11:25
g2 said...
@anonymous 10:38
come to font and try some "first problem of that grade in
fontainebleau" (e.g. marie-rose first 6a, la joker first 7a, c'etait
demain first 8a, etc...)
Then try some newer problems in the same grades.
we'll see if you'll have the same opinion that the current grades
are sandbagged ;)
4/3/10 11:32
anonymous said...
Hi Nalle,
Very interesting article.
I climb in Fontainebleau, in the range of 7A (V6), so i can't really
tell about 8B/8C.
But i still have so questions/thoughts :
- You climbed The Island, with the same method as Dave (?),
and graded it 8C. Now, Vincent Pochon has put-up a version
from the ground (adding two V7 moves), that still weight 8C.
What do you think about this boulder ?, is-it a good standart for
8C in Font ?
- I've been climbing for 12 years and done aprox 40 boulders
around 7a. Some i did flash, others in 2 attempts and most of
them took me much more time. To me, it's really a question of :
style/anti-style, good conditions, knowing the beta or trying by
yourself, your actual shape. Whatever, even in Font the V6
grade is quite wide !!
Cheers.
Alex
4/3/10 11:38
anonymous said...
Grades should have depth. Just because boulder A feels more
difficult to the person than boulder B doesn't mean it warrants a
new grade. In some countries and areas 8c was jumped into
before 8b+ had been properly established, in other places it was
necessary. Time will show which was which...
4/3/10 12:01
nalle hukkataival said...
@anonymous
I have been to Fontainebleau and climbed La Marie Rose, La
Joker and C'etait demain, the first 6A, 7A and 8A in the world
and a lot of other problems.
@Tony
I think the idea of combining the Font/V-grage and the B-grade
is very interesting, for example 8C B3.
@Alex
Vincent's start to the Island may be a little more logical, but in
the end it is very very close to Dave's start, just another
persons vision. Simply, two 7b moves barely add any difficulty
to an 8C boulder. There is a sit-start project to The Island,
adding 8 very hard moves directly into it, without a rest, which
would surely be 8C+.
Obviously the conditions, the shape you're in and if the style
suits you are huge factors in grading, but what comes to
professional climbers, all we do is climb, all year. I'm sure most
of us know our own weaknesses, strengths and the shape we're
in really well.
@ anonymous
Grading is more simple within an area or even a country, but
maintaining a global standard is what's hard. One reason being
that there are not that many people out there, who travel the
world constantly, climbing in different areas.
Maybe it was a mistake in the first place, when the
Fontainebleau-grade and the V-grade got unified.
I understand that the issues in the upper-end of the scale cause
problems throughout the whole scale and I don't really know
what to say to that. If the upper-end of the scale is illogical, I'm
sure it affects the lower grades too in some way.
4/3/10 13:56
vh said...
I think one mistake that is made in grading (both sport and
boulder) is that people sometimes mistake added time for added
difficulty. Such might sometimes be the case, but as you
approach your limits the amount of time you must put into
something goes up exponentially - yet the grade should not.
Speaking for myself, I've done climbs fairly quickly that were a
half-grade lower than a climb that totally shut me down. That
1/2 grade can make all the difference. If I had succeeded after
enormous effort, I would have thought, "this is MUCH harder
than anything I've ever done, thus it must be a grade harder!"
That, of course, isn't necessarily true. I might have just reached
my limit...
I think there will always be difficulty solidifying upper end
grades...
4/3/10 17:36
anonymous said...
its funny you say approach it in a humble manner.. didn't you
put up Tequila Sunrise, which now has been downgraded by
everyone one or 2 numbers down.. one person happening to be
a girl.
4/3/10 18:42
anonymous said...
I'm not sure if others have brought this point up as I didnt read
every post, and I'm not sure it matters in the scheme of things,
but wasn't dreamtime downgraded because folks brushed holds
too hard and made them easier? I think there is also something
similar going on with El Techo although that may have to do with
the downgrade from V13 to V11. I'd be interested to hear
though what you think about the Dreamtime issue. Thank you
4/3/10 19:07
anonymous said...
down grade this.. up grade that.. SHUT THE FUCK UP!!
4/3/10 19:37
anonymous said...
The fact that Dreamtime has been chipped is an evidence.. This
has been confirmed by a bunch of top climbers.
4/3/10 19:39
anonymous said...
This article was very interesting, and a breath of fresh air!
>down grade this.. up grade that.. SHUT THE
>FUCK UP!!
If we can't discuss openly about these things, then what we can
discuss IMHO? Weather? Men's fashion? I mean: it's ONLY
grades. ;)
4/3/10 20:26
anonymous said...
Perhaps the problem is that the entire scale continues to be
compressed due to the fact the no one ever wants to take or
offer the higher grades. This top down compression permeates
through the entire range of grades causing discrepancies along
the entire grade scale.
4/3/10 21:39
nalle hukkataival said...
Dreamtime did indeed get chipped, but regardless it was never
8C. The chipping/brushing only brought it down from a normal
8B+ to a lower-end 8B+. Now it is broken and it still goes, but it
will break again, because the remaining part of the hold that
broke is still loose.
Apparently, there is new beta on Tequila Sunrise, that I tried
when I was working on it and did not see it being a reasonable
method at the time of the first ascent. It is one possibility that
holds got slightly better after the FA, as seems to happen to
many boulders in Hueco, making the new shoulder way possible.
I have not seen the problem since, so I do not know if that is
the case. I also started in a different place than people are
starting it nowadays. On the same trip I flashed four V12's and
Tequila Sunrise was definitely V13 compared to those problems.
Seems like my beta on Tequila Sunrise was not very good for a
reason or another.
I am not claiming to be a perfect role-model concerning grading,
or necessarily having a "clean track record". Point is, we can all
(including myself) learn something from this discussion. Lastly, I
do not see any issue with a girl repeating my boulder problem.
4/3/10 22:04
marc germani said...
hi Nalle, what do you think about "Kings of Sonlerto 8B+" by
Dave Graham in Chironico/Ticino? Don't you think it's also
another standard for that grade? but i think it's unrepeated...
and have you tried it? or are you interesting in doing so?
5/3/10 01:09
nalle hukkataival said...
I have only seen Kings of Sonlerto, but never tried it because
there have been a lot of access issues.
5/3/10 01:27
jkd said...
i think bernd zangerl has climbed kings of sonlerto too. and yes,
access issues now for that (as well as for the "wheelbarrow
project").
5/3/10 05:05
marc germani said...
also another point to add to this conversation. When a climber
finds another easier beta for a boulder, he should not keep it the
same grade, just to say that he has sent it. I say he should put
the grade he/she feels.
Like Adam Ondra, he flashed Confessions, he said it was really
his style, and he said it can't be 8B+, so he put it 8B.
his comment on 8a.nu:
Well, 8B+ flash sounds amazing but I can't put as 8B+, it was all
too simple compared to The Dagger or La Proue. I just gave it
go without expecting anything and suddenly I was on the top
and did not find it very hard. But I do not say it can't be 8B+, it
might have been pretty much my style or I don't know... To
flash The Vice was much more difficult for me. see Martin's
comment as well.
now that's a great comment on an ascent. I say it says a lot
more than by just grading it. I would like to see more of it with
other climbers.
5/3/10 05:13
anonymous said...
New beta or holds got slighty better might be the reason for
downgrades with Fred Nicole's Hueco problems as well, don't
you think?
5/3/10 08:13
anonymous said...
Your argument sounds reasonable at first Nalle. But you are
suggesting that all top level climbers who have done numerous
8b+ before suggesting 8c for their hardest climb ever, are all
wrong. You suggest that their "new level" problems are also 8b+.
I find it hard to believe that the two dozen or so climbers that
are doing 8b+ today are all climbing problems of the exact
same grade. And that they after spending months on one
project don't actually climb one grade higher. A climber that
projects something that suits him or her can always climb a
grade or two higher than what they do in a day on a trip.
What you and Dave are aiming for is a widening of the 8b+
grade, making it the "widest" and most inclusive grade yet. I
don't see the point in that. If we want to keep the 8b+ grade in
normal "with" then we need to push lots of 8b+ down into 8b,
which only widens the 8b grade, which in turn could be pushed
further down the scale. This of course only pushes the problem
down the scale instead of solving it.
I think the story of two worlds, livin large and a few other
problems deserve 8c+, as they are significantly harder than for
example jade or Terramer which are in turn significantly harder
than most other 8b+.
Why should there be a bigger step going from 8b+ to 8c than
from 8b to 8b+?
5/3/10 12:15
anonymous said...
Here a comment from Nick Duttle on 8a.nu about Diaphanous
sea (former V12)
"This climb was pretty much standard until I broke the hold off
while working Terremer. The hold then was aggressively
brushed making both climbs EASIER!! Now is likely V10/11.
BLAM!!"
5/3/10 12:18
nalle hukkataival said...
Perhaps grading Story of Two Worlds lower-end 8C+ is the way
to go in the end, but as long as there are 55!!! proposed 8C and
8C+ boulders in the world (many of which do not deserve the
grade), I think it is very important to have a solid (high-end 8C)
standard to compare these problems to.
The range of 8B+ has changed in the upper end, but also
correspondingly in the lower end. Radja, the first 8B+ and the
old standard(?) is barely considered 8B+ anymore. I don't think
8B+ is any "wider" than other grades (it shouldn't be at least).
One other thing that also affects the grading scale are boulder-
routes like Wheel of Life which is graded 8C+ even though,
being 68 moves long, it should have a 9a+ route-grade
(according to the first ascentionist). It is of course very hard to
draw the line between what is a boulder-route and what is not.
5/3/10 14:39
peter said...
well, these people giving a grade of 8C (or 8C+) to their FA's,
they surely most of the time are experienced climbers, having
done bunch of 8B+ problems before. and in their opinion, their
climbs deserve the 8C grade, because they follow the logic
of "what is HARDER than the 8B+ boulders ive done, must be
8C". and actually i see no problem in this. its logic. its what
daniel did with desperanza. but here we see the actual problem.
in this case 7B(?) into 8B+ (hard?) makes the 8C grade. and
others do 8B+ into 8B+ and give it also an 8C grade... this is
resulting in a big uncertanty about what 8C is. some guys try to
define it as the ultimate reachable, others say, its just harder
than 8B+. actually simple. so its not about defining what is
benchmark (its really difficult to compare different problems at
all, especially on your own limit) but its all about defining what
the word "harder" means, the step that makes 8C coming from
8B+! it has to be a SIGNIFICANT thing! means,
something "measureable"/"feelable", but objective not
subjective. actually this is about the "+"...
5/3/10 15:26
marpa said...
What about GIOIA in Varazze, Italy, put up by former world
champion Cristian Core? Have you tried it? Have you heard of
it? An Italian magazine has recently reported it to be 8C+, since
it appears to be the real next level to all of the strong guys who
tried it. Come to Italy!
Marpa
5/3/10 16:11
anonymous said...
It seems a bit foolish of Core to suggest 8C+ as he doesn't
know the full range of 8C yet (who does?). How many non-FA
8C has he done?
On the other hand if he would have suggested hard 8b+ it would
probably never be repeated, so high grades attract people and
leads to correct grading eventually.
chris
5/3/10 16:25
nalle hukkataival said...
@Peter
Yes, but what about when those 8B+'s, that the new proposed
8C grade was based on, get later (rightfully) downgraded? Often
the 8C grade still remains for a long time, causing more
problems.
Someone mentioned that there is only one way for grades to go
and that is down. I do not agree with this statement at all. We
CAN give grades that won't get downgraded. The deflation of
grades has been going on for too many years now. To stop it,
we need to give a little stiffer grades that won't get downgraded
as easily. This trend of downgrading may seem pointless to
many, but it has been (and still is) necessary to keep the
grading scale logical.
The primary goal is to keep the grading scale logical, even if
that is at the cost of slightly changing the upper-end grades
from what they are now.
5/3/10 16:49
nalle hukkataival said...
I'm psyched to try Gioia. I haven't tried it, so I can't comment
on it. My understanding was that Christian Core graded it 8C
and it somehow got upgraded later on, although I haven't heard
that anyone would have tried to repeat it???
5/3/10 16:55
anonymous said...
@ marco germani
It's worth noting that confessions had already had a very rapid
repeat by Brit darkhorse Mickey Page who thought it was only
8b. Props to Ondra for his honesty too.
@peter
When making first ascents(i've done a few) the feeling of
difficulty I think is skewed, partly because there is no beta so
it's easy to get fixated on one way of trying and partly the
psychological baggage one can bring to a new line. For some it
won't affect them at all, others more so. A classic example is
Malcolm Smith and the Monk Life. Malc could and can climb 8b in
a sess, the guy's a beast. He worked on the Monk Life on and off
for 10 years, eventually it was ticked and given only 8b+ which
seems like madness considering the time spent. Repeated by
Andy Earl after a lot of work and shockingly by John Gaskins
after only two sessions who both agreed the level. The easy
thing would've been for Malc to give it 8c as it felt a lot harder
than Dreamtime but I respect his conservative approach and
understanding of the depth needed within grades .....
5/3/10 18:38
anonymous said...
Nalle, I really think you are doing a good job sharing the
thoughts on the subject...and I agree on everything you say :-)
Jens Larssen, www.8a.nu
5/3/10 19:31
anonymous said...
Ditto on Jens Larssen's post, although I find it bit confusing that
he also agrees with the arguments put forth by Daniel Woods,
regarding the grading of Desperenza (which seems to have
triggered the discussion above)...
But since Jens Larssen commented (and because we are talking
about grades here), I tink all of us would like to hear one of you
pro-climbers take on the 8a "Time comparison grading theoty"?
If the theory holds water, then - as an example - Desperenza, a
7a+ into 8b+, is 8c when you take into consideration how much
time X many strong climbers spent on the problem before it was
completed.
Peter
5/3/10 20:56
anonymous said...
Great discussion,here is a comment from the brazilian gueto, My
name is Raul and I've been climbbing for 10 years now. I agree
with some here, I dont think that for you to send an 8c you
gotta link two 8b+ into each other.this calculation for me is a bit
crazy. the new generations are comming strong and soon we
gonna see 8b+ beeing flashed, but that doesnt mean that the
climb is easy. it means that the climber is strong,in a good
moment even lucky or all together. I dont see the point of
fearing to push the grade, it seems to me that the downgrader is
willing to get the media into him rather than being sincerely
onest with his self and others, I remember when Adam ondra
was downgrading everything that he climbed and always when
he did so he got impresive amounts of "glamour" on his back, as
if he was the messiah who is bringing the truth, but infact he is
just the strongest young kid around, and if he is so superior on
the high end grades up to the point of downgradding 70% of his
acents, why does he still fucks around and do not open ground
breaking routes and boulders, because at the end he has done
over 1000 ascents. I dont think that any of his ascents so far
took him more than 50 tries. I personally think that Adam
ondra, Dave graham and our host Nalle are so, so strong that
they have no idea! for them 8b+,8c and 8c+ could be done with
the same amount of physical effort! but they don't know that.
I'm with the old school I think, Nicole and koymada.
ps: sharma when he did the mandala said that it was the
herdest boulder he had ever done and if I'm not wrong he said it
in the video it could be even V14. what you called that? crazy,
weak, strong,LOCO? I think i'm getting loco here writing this!!!!!
good climb to everyone and crimp until you pop your tendon or
break the rock!!!! Rasta live
5/3/10 21:04
anonymous said...
Great article Nalle – I agree with most, but not all of it.
Bouldering is a young sport and clearly the grading system has
evolved in different ways as it has been applied in various
places around the world. If you live in Switzerland, then no
doubt you think that there has been a tendency to keep
downgrading things in the past decade. Equally, if you live in the
UK, the tendency has been to upgrade things in the same
period. The reason? Because, very slowly, due to people
travelling more, people are starting to realise the discrepancies
between different areas and they are gradually starting to
equalise out (grades in Font and the US, tend to be roughly in
between those in the UK and
Switzerland – although there are subtleties, such as that the
newer problems in Font are often softer graded than the older
ones).
At the end of the day, what any one person thinks 8B “is”
depends on which subset of the world’s boulders they have
climbed in and around that grade. In other words, if like Tyler
Landman, you’ve grown up in the UK and your first 8B was The
Ace, then you're going to have a VERY different opinion as to
what 8B “is” than someone who has grown up bouldering in
Magic Wood. In fact your whole grading system is probably
going to be different by around a grade and a half.
And is anyone really surprised that Daniel Woods and Dave
Graham have differences of opinion as to what 8C “is”. Daniel
has never climbed anything hard in Font (I’m not sure he’s even
been there) – most of his hard problems have been in
Switzerland, Rocklands, or the US. Dave on the other hand has
spent lots of time in Font as well as in Switzerland and the US.
Clearly, where you have done most of your hard problems is
going to have a significant effect on what you view a certain
grade to “be”. So people should definitely NOT take these
arguments personally – it is precisely these differences of
opinion which in time will lead to a consensus between the
different areas. Of course, from time to time, there may be an
element of certain people grading for publicity, but I actually
think that it is pretty rare. For the most part people just grade
things based on comparisons with other similar grade problems
which they have climbed.
For anyone thinking that an accurate grading system is
completely impossible due to differences in body type etc – well
obviously for any one person on a particular problem, that is
true. But that isn’t what is being talked about here – we’re
talking about systematic differences in the GRADING SYSTEM
between different countries, different groups and different
individuals. I.e if you took 100 problems that person one and
person two had climbed, person one gives harder grades for 99
out of 100 problems. That doesn’t mean that he is “right” and
person two is “wrong” – it just means that they have been using
different grading systems – and these kinds of systematic
differences CAN be ironed out in time – given honesty on all
sides and more repeats of the relevant problem sets.
Over the last decade the systematic differences have been
slowly getting smaller, but there is still quite a long way to go.
So just because one person gives a problem 8B+ doesn't mean
that in fact it isn't much harder than lots of problems currently
given 8C.
One thing I disagree with Nalle about is that this grading “mess”
only started in 2000 with Dreamtime. In fact the discrepancies
between areas had been just as big or bigger all through the
90s – although the fluctuating conversions between completely
different systems (ie Font vs.V grades) sometimes did a pretty
good job of hiding it. But it was only really from 2000 onwards
that the likes of Dave Graham and others travelled around and
pointed out some of the disparities. The growth of the web and
sites like 8a.nu also made a huge difference by making some of
these differences abundantly clear.
5/3/10 21:25
anonymous said...
In a comment above, Nalle said that:
“Grading is more simple within an area or even a country, but
maintaining a global standard is what's hard. One reason being
that there are not that many people out there, who travel the
world constantly, climbing in different areas.”
I agree that this IS the main issue - however, I don’t feel that it
really is THAT hard – it just is going to take a little time to adjust
the average grading systems in different areas to bring them
into line. i.e A lot of stuff in Switzerland and Rocklands STILL
needs downgrading. A lot of stuff in certain areas in the UK
(mainly the Peak) STILL needs upgrading (some of it quite a
lot), and some stuff in Font and the US needs adjusting to be a
little more consistent.
Hopefully in time, these systematic discrepancies in grading
systems between areas and individuals will get resolved. Then
maybe the media and wider climbing community might have a
bit more of a clue as to what really was or is impressive or
cutting edge - and so appropriate credit could be given where it
is due, both to the current generation of top end climbers and
their predecessors. At the end of the day it is the feeling that
certain people have a much bigger profile than they really
deserve which leads to all the resentment and arguments.
@Peter
Jens' Time Grading System - if taken literally - is absurd. But I
don't think it was ever meant to be taken literally. What you
CAN tell from the time someone has taken to do a problem is
roughly a MAX possible grade for that problem (or route). You
can NEVER tell a minimum possible grade for it. In other words,
if Chris Sharma has the flu, is recovering from a snapped
tendon, and hasn't climbed for 6 months he could easily spend 5
days on a French 7a.
So you can NEVER say what grade a problem actually IS from
the amount of time they have spent on it. But you CAN say that
if someone who has never bouldered 8B+ before suddenly
climbs an 8C+ in a few hours, that it is pretty unlikely that the
problem really is 8C+. And I think that that is all Jens ever
meant to say.
The problem with a lot of what Jens says on 8a.nu is that he is
not very good at english and so I suspect that a lot of what he
means gets lost in translation....
5/3/10 21:26
anonymous said...
I don't believe he would make more sense in Swedish. He just
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
post a comment
Comment as:
55
66
6Select profile...
Post Comment Preview
Home Older Post
doesn't have the capacity for abstract thought. For example the
way he agrees with two opposing sides here just because they
are both strong climbers.
5/3/10 22:17