Climbing Grades
I’m about to open up a whole can of worms here… actually discussing climbing grades. Most people treat climbing grades like politics or religion, topics best not talked about in public and only amongst a close group of friends. I however have a different opinion (surprise, surprise). I think grades should be talked about and discussed. Basically routes are given a tentative grade based on what the first ascentionist felt the difficulty of the grade should be. From that point on however I think each person who attempts the route should comment on the grade, even if they don’t complete the route. Granted their opinion has more validity if they do complete the route but most people can comment after trying and doing or failing to do the moves. There’s no way that every 5.12a I’ve ever climbed feels the same just like there’s no way that a steep 13a and a vertical 13a can feel the same, or can feel the same for different people. Grades are a consensus and should/must be discussed in order for the consensus to be more accurate.
I recently ran across an interview with Lynn Hill after her redpoint of a boulder problem called Chablanke in Hueco Tanks, TX. Chablanke is a great problem rated V11 but after doing it, and trying it with different people, it is obvious that it is easier if you are short. Just like there are boulder problems that are easier if you are tall. The full interview is here but the part I liked is pasted below:
Do you agree with the grade?
Since I’m not used to the bouldering rating system it’s difficult for me to say. The rating system is based on the perceived difficulty by people of average size, so I’m not a good judge of what the grade should be. I am used to accounting for my own perception outside the bell curve.
While I wish she had come right out and commented about her perceived difficulty of the climb I still like this quote because she hits the nail on the head about grades “perceived difficulty by people of average size” and “accounting for my own perceptions outside the bell curve”. Basically the more you climb the better a sense you get of a certain grade FOR YOU. I’m a sport climber and for me it seems that in bouldering or crack climbing grades are all over the place. Both disciplines can target strengths or weaknesses quickly. With bouldering I just the (+/- 3) system. If a boulder grade is within the +/- 3 of the given grade (some V6s can feel like V3 or V9…) then I don’t complain (too much) and with crack climbing I can’t grade anything at all and even with sport climbing I would usually let +/- a letter grade slip by. In sport climbing I tend to downgrade endurance based routes since that is my strength but at the same time I upgrade powerful or reachy routes. I don’t get upset when people downgrade routes that are hard for me, that’s their opinion and they are entitled to it but it cracks me up when people get upset when I mention that a route is soft FOR ME, as if that impacts how it felt for them??? A great example is a route called Badman in Smith Rock, OR. The crux is a big reach off an undercling and it took me forever to figure out beta to be able to do this route. The route is rated 14a although some people think it is 13d. For me it honestly felt 14c, it’s just the nature of the route.
On a way more contraversial level I also think there is more to a route than just the pure difficulty. Sometimes the complexity or level of committment required should factor into the grade. This is where people really get upset. I think short powerful routes that are easy to work tend to not be as involved as long complex routes even if the actual ‘difficulty’ is the same. Also I think that linkups after you have done every move on other routes should be graded stiffly (given an easier grade). Whether we like it or not there is a certain status to grades and I think the status should be placed on the overall experience of the route. Again, that is my opinion and should not affect how the route feels TO YOU.
All of this however brings about the discussion of the website 8a.nu. On 8a.nu climbers log their routes and for every route you enter the grade, name and some comments about the route. What do you think people should enter for the grade? Should everyone simply enter the guidebook grade? What about if a hold breaks? The route gets more polished with time? Or the route exploits your strengths/weaknesses? What is the purpose of 8a? Is it simply a log book of climbs or is it a tool for guidebook authors and people traveling? I think people should enter how the route felt to them and the grade of the route is the average of the entered grades. If you think the route should be downgraded then enter a lower grade, if you think the route should be upgraded enter a higher grade, if the route is within the right range then simple input that it is soft or hard or just right for the grade.
Then of course there is the whole political game of grades. What if a route you think is soft is the first of a certain grade for a friend? What if an ascent is newsworthy for the grade but in reality the route is softer?I have no answer for this. I sometimes downgrade a route and log it as such but it’s rare since people do get offended.
I guess the point of this post is that grade discussions should not be taboo. There is no science to it.
This doesn’t change the fact that I’m still an asshole when I downgrade your project, but I’ll downgrade it with a smile on my face 
. Please feel free to downgrade my routes, I deserve it.
Posted on March 26th, 2009 by Mike Doyle
Filed under: Rant
Long post, long comment, hope you don’t mind.
First, I am always a bit suspicious before I start reading yet another grade post, as I usually end up having no strong opinion regarding the posters input, and I feel like I wasted my time. Not the case here: this was a pretty good read!
I totally agree with you that grades should be determined by consensus. I would even go as far as to say the FAist’s grade should be considered tentative if not suspicious. And yes, there should also be that understanding that the consensus grade ends up representing what the route should feel like for the average climber, not for you /me/my buddie.
Where I do disagree is with your degree of tolerance to softness/sandbagging. I can tolerate within one, maybe two LETTERS off my feeling of the grade, but one whole grade is totally unacceptable. Just consider my level, for a bit of perspective: Right now 5.11a is my onsight level. When I start up an 11a, I go for the flash, and sometimes I get shut down (i.e. it feels 11b, if it feels 11c I consider it sandbagged). And 12a is pretty much my project level. I expect to get to the top and feel like the route is doable with some work (and yes, people like you do tend to downgrade my 12a routes to 11d, which sucks, but hey, you’re such a friendly guy (we met at Rumney 2 seasons ago (and I still tell people how nice you were (and you told me flashing predator hadn’t been that hard (which I still find hard to believe)))))
Anyway, you can see why a full grade, even for climbers that are worlds away in terms of physique, is a bit off the mark: an 11a, that I should onsight, feels like a 12a, that I should project?
And I do see your point about 8a.nu. For me though (at my level) I find mountain project to be a way better source of consensus. I truly believe that is where the most representative grades will be found.
Cheers.
Hey Steve,
Sorry, by one grade I meant one letter grade for sport climbing. I just feel I have a better understanding of grading sport routes of different styles, different rock types and with different cruxes. I’ll usually let one ‘letter’ grade discrepancy slip but if it’s two or more letters I’ll comment.
That being said I think there are certain grades that deserve more scrutiny and respect; 11a, 12a, 13a, 14a… Each of these is a milestone in a climbers life and should be hard to obtain. I remember the first time I went to Europe I thought there was a huge difference between 7c+ and 8a. Part of this is due to the fact that 7c+ spans a larger grade (12d/13a) and part of this is that people respect the 8a grade. In order for a route to be given 8a it must really be 8a, not soft 8a or possible 7c+. This has changed at some of the newer areas where you’ll find soft 8a routes.
I think there should be benchmark routes at these grades and unless a route is harder than the benchmark it gets the lower grade. In North America I also think we are ‘polite’ and will give a higher grade rather than upset someone and downgrade it.
Thanks for your comment.
Mike – oh yeah – got to love this kind of talk, not enough of it out there.
You must be happy as your team may actually win the division!!!
jd
i still can’t believe you guys are #1 in the division fricking lame-ass Flames.
Grades – wow, risky for such a nice guy. Home grown grading really only works at the onset of a route – after that it gets sieged or lapped so often that the original grade becomes the repeated grade – unless some non-locals show up and just climb the rigs and then you can get a solid setting.
The DG, JK, IC crew that showed at the phlale a year or so back did a solid job – beam me up 8b, endless hard 8b like le rose e le vampire basically an 8b+. Existence 8c, Bhunda de fora 8C+/9a – it took DG 20 fricking tries after he’d been sending 8c+ pretty quick that season. Leviathan 8b+.
height at times makes routes/problems easier or harder, but the grade should be set for the norm on this. It’s not like JB Tibout is tall – he’s about 5’6″ – look at back in the day with Franklin vs. Karn 5’4″ vs. 6’2″ and they both did each others routes.
Look at Derek Galloway, he’s the consummate down grader, but comes across a bit like a dick, as he downgrades others and often fails to see his own ability level. He climbs 5.14 and has a lot of effort on a 8a+ at Bataan and then after a lot of tries calls it 8a. Well i do know the diff b/w 13b and 13c – so does he, and the effort it takes when you are climbing 14 is fully different – the b’s are most often quick ticks onsight/flash or a few tries at most – the c’s do take more effort and focus – they can often come at the same speed, but if they don’t – they are likely on the “not-your-style” c and require more goes to send.
But back to the deal and example – Logan Utah – Tweak – 13d with ladder start and easy finish – still 13d, but if you put a lot of effort into sending it’ll feel like an easy 13c when sending. So when you put together the boulder start, is it really 14a, or just another version of the 13d – cause you have the d wired?
Are the Maple Creek pipedream 14′s the same 5.14 grade as the Present, or as Dead Souls?
If i can lap out Dead Souls but not climb the Maple 14s, are they still the same grades? Or the opposite – i can lap out and add another 10 feet to the pipedream routes hit it up at 14c, but still not get up Dead Souls.
oops i just think i tangented there – that was really a thing on routes – are they the whole, or sum of the parts? Is Super Tweak the line and the others off of it are just deviations? Are the pipe dream routes really 14 at their full existence and less than 14 for the other exits?
Do you see or hear of Hubble being downgraded or 20 hits a season? but you will see the endurance rigs with multiple hits – this was really a Jerry Moffat quote where he noted that hard bouldery routes, like Hubble, Action Direct will always be “hard” but others like Le spectre will get onsighted with fitness.
wow that’s a lot of stuff out of my noggin – still a bit pissy about the Flames!
Doglegg!!!!!!!!
Oh, and Calgary better win the division