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