Even when discussing grades from V8/7B and under, (my highest grade) I also get the feeling that people feel attacked when talking about downgrading. Even when its not their climb... I think its important to have honest discussions about it and not take offense when someone has an opinion or sees a climb differently. Also, most outdoor boulders of any level will not feel the same for two individuals. Climbing is a style sport and everyone is different. A good example to check out is watch Nico and Simon send Soudain Soul. For the end, Simon has to match the sloper after a crazy throw with the left and Nico uses a few more heal hooks to gain the sloper with the right hand and no heal for the bump. Who is to say which is easier/harder but Simon discuses in his video that this was the only way for him to work it out. Its good to note differences and be honest when something is harder or easier. Its a lot lamer to say I sent a V4 but it felt V5 than to say the V4 felt like a V3, hence why people like to downgrade. But as a 6' 4 (193 cm) climber this happens quite a bit. Sometimes I can completely break a boulder with my height, other times moves have been impossible until I am a few grades above said route. But the most important thing is being honest, have good discussions and not be offended when a climb is easier for someone other than you! That's the game we play!! Also be proud of beta breaks! (short or tall) It keeps the sport moving forward!! Sorry for the long text, but this does happen to me a lot haha!
Adam Shahar just sent Sleepwalker in quick fashion (2nd session?) and also gave it V15. Zander Waller gave it that grade prior to Will mostly due to his reach advantage. But I think it probably has the most repeats of any proposed V16, so I think Will is correct that it will probably eventually land at V15.
Noah wheeler discussed how it’s extremely height dependent. For those who are taller it can even be middle range 15, but if you’re short enough (like drew ruana) then you physically cannot skip certain moves and it’s a hard 16.
@@ianjaggi Yes, I think Sleepwalker is a peculiar boulder in that it has seen ascents from people who don't typically climb V16, but also guys like Sean Bailey and Shawn Rabatou who have done V17 have not been able to send it. So it does appear to be very height dependent.
I don't think number of repeats necessarily means that much for it being soft considering much stronger climbers have gotten in the last 10 years. Recently we've had Colin Duffy send Defying Gravity, a solid v15 in a single session, and Hamish Mcarthur sending big Z v16 in 3 sessions.
(context, V11-12 climber) In terms of "taking" the higher grade when I gave it a personal down grade, I personally do. I will ultimately just say "I did Boulder A" instead of "I did Boulder A, VX" but in terms of tracking my progress, I will take the consensus. I kind of round up when THINKING about my own progress in terms of personal upgrades because that at least gets filtered into my brain as a "hard end of the VX range". While I will tell others I did VX instead of VX+1, it marks more significant progress as a climber because I overcame something that was disproportionally harder for me than others. One other detail I'll mention is that hold DO get wrose/better as time goes on. That tends to be extremely polarizing in my experience, as while the thought process of "the boulder was VX before the hold got better, therefore the boulder is not VX-1" seems logical, it may not ALYWAYS be the case, but rhetorically that gets tricky because people don't want to claim the same accomplishments when their experience was objectively easier. Grades are ranges, and sometimes a single hold getting worse/better can move a grade, but sometimes not.
Here in the climbing gym people can write down their suggestion for the grade of routes. We get wildly different grade suggestions. One and the same route can have several people who say 6c while many others say 7a. And that’s with the nice, controlled conditions of a gym and with much fewer beta options than on real rock. So if dozens of people can’t agree on the grade of easier routes, why would we expect the few people who’ve climbed the world’s hardest routes and boulders to agree?
If only 5 people in the world can do a problem, then the grade is irrelevant to the rest of us, especially those of us who climb several magnitudes below that level. Such discussions only REALLY are relevant to those who have a chance of doing these things.
And to us who can admire the feat. Admire the hardest climbs and the strongest climbers in the world. We should probably pay less attention to grades in our own recreation, but I am glad will takes grading seriously, it really is an honour system. The only difference between a 9A boulder and a 2 hour maraton is the sport and the subjectivity of the measure.
Yeah I’m really tired of everyone focusing on things we will never do. V0-v10 range is far more important than the V10+ range. Anything above that is just Vhard
Yeah I agree their opinions are the only ones really relevant and valid. I recently read multiple "commentators" downplaying Sean Bailey's accomplishment because stuff didn't "look hard" and he "hadn't sent a V17 yet." So weird to me, because when he did it... he was literally climbing with another multiple v17 climber who had already worked on it with other powerhouse climbers.
I agree. I don't understand why people argue about is more a V16 or V17. As if it actually was measurable and not just based on your strenghts and weaknesses
I don't agree with the concept of "easier" beta. One person's easier beta might not be easier for someone else. If you're tall, a high foot option might not be possible, so you're forced to reach. But then if you're short, maybe you can't reach, so you have to find a bad intermidiate, etc. Grading in climbing is inherently flawed and prone to being inaccurate because climbing is subjective by nature.
I agree grades are flawed but they offer the best guess to guide a climber on what they might try on a trip. I totally think easier beta is a thing, especially with FAs or climbs with little repeats due to the first ascensionist just not seeing the correct beta and climbing it a harder way
Of course, there is easier and harder beta. A grade by definition must apply to the easiest beta, otherwise we can just throw them out of the window completely. There is always a harder way to do something. Of course, grading the "easiest" beta has limitations. Being morpho gets the most attention, but style is just as important. Just because someone climbs a certain grade on overhanging crimps, it does not make them climb the same grade on a slab or crack. Grading is just an orientation of what makes sense to try (in sport climbing or bouldering) or what is reasonably safe to try (in mountaineering and alpine climbing). But for that orientation to work, we have to assume the easiest beta. (This also shows how a grade can feel much different in alpine climbing. You are effectively onsighting everything without any time for working the beta. One might even be a few meters off the route without noticing until it gets much harder)
Understand what you're saying but there can totally be objectively easier beta. I think what you're really getting at is that climbing grades are really constructed based on avg white male morphology which in many ways ignores the variance of difficulty individuals feel when doing different types of moves. My opinion: Grades should be used as a rough indicator on which problems are worth your time and effort to check out. Your personal attributes will make it feel harder or easier or about what you expect. Goals should be based on enjoyment / challenge and not on an arbitrary number some random people decided felt right.
What a lot of the internet dialoguists seems to struggle with is that grades are definitely subjective.... but the subjects who get to have an opinion are people who can climb stuff in this range of difficulty. It's so strange to hear random people with such intense opinions about this stuff.
The worst thing about grades are the non-pros like myself and just can't not talk about their oppinion on a grade without climbing... Just shut up until you have climbed it bro, that's what the pros do, they might say how a climb feels to them when climbing it but don't say grades until they have sent it. That said I have to say most of these grades discussions come from admiration and passion... If people are not passionate about the sport and their idols, then they probably wouldn't spend time discussing grades.
I think it's still too early to talk about upgrading. 8 sessions isn't a lot compared to what Nalle put into Burden or Daniel put into Return. If Will puts 15+ days into it then we can start to speculate it's probably V17 (at least for Will)
@@mauricereschke9318 The beta being out there is important, as you said, but also the mere notion that something is possible really effects the mental said of things.
This silly human obsession with the "single grade" phenomenon, and subsequent "downgrading" is astounding and I can't believe we are still here...almost like we WANT something to argue about and not advance the system? This trivial issue could be solved if we finally did away with this silly single "V" grade, which was "created" by some old drunk dude in the 70's or 80's, and admit that it's ok to embrace a more accurate system spanning multiple grades (if we MUST continue to use this V grade thing) via a color system, or something similar (like we do in modern climbing gyms). There is no "one grade" and never will be...that's like saying all humans possess the exact same shaped nose.
Personally I’m often surprised how accurate grades can be. I think the inherent limitations of subjective grades are obvious and won’t change if you use colors instead of numbers or reduce the granularity.
Use code ‘STRUGGLE’ for 15% off storewide from Rúngne ▶︎ thestruggleclimbingshow.com/Rungneyoutube2
Let’s be honest, grades are de-betable.
Hahahaha
I'd day they are subjective
Even when discussing grades from V8/7B and under, (my highest grade) I also get the feeling that people feel attacked when talking about downgrading. Even when its not their climb... I think its important to have honest discussions about it and not take offense when someone has an opinion or sees a climb differently.
Also, most outdoor boulders of any level will not feel the same for two individuals. Climbing is a style sport and everyone is different. A good example to check out is watch Nico and Simon send Soudain Soul. For the end, Simon has to match the sloper after a crazy throw with the left and Nico uses a few more heal hooks to gain the sloper with the right hand and no heal for the bump. Who is to say which is easier/harder but Simon discuses in his video that this was the only way for him to work it out.
Its good to note differences and be honest when something is harder or easier. Its a lot lamer to say I sent a V4 but it felt V5 than to say the V4 felt like a V3, hence why people like to downgrade. But as a 6' 4 (193 cm) climber this happens quite a bit. Sometimes I can completely break a boulder with my height, other times moves have been impossible until I am a few grades above said route. But the most important thing is being honest, have good discussions and not be offended when a climb is easier for someone other than you! That's the game we play!!
Also be proud of beta breaks! (short or tall) It keeps the sport moving forward!! Sorry for the long text, but this does happen to me a lot haha!
Adam Shahar just sent Sleepwalker in quick fashion (2nd session?) and also gave it V15. Zander Waller gave it that grade prior to Will mostly due to his reach advantage. But I think it probably has the most repeats of any proposed V16, so I think Will is correct that it will probably eventually land at V15.
Noah wheeler discussed how it’s extremely height dependent. For those who are taller it can even be middle range 15, but if you’re short enough (like drew ruana) then you physically cannot skip certain moves and it’s a hard 16.
Isn’t shahar short?
@@ianjaggi Yes, I think Sleepwalker is a peculiar boulder in that it has seen ascents from people who don't typically climb V16, but also guys like Sean Bailey and Shawn Rabatou who have done V17 have not been able to send it. So it does appear to be very height dependent.
@@aidanscarffe5256 5'10, 1 inch shorter than noah
I don't think number of repeats necessarily means that much for it being soft considering much stronger climbers have gotten in the last 10 years. Recently we've had Colin Duffy send Defying Gravity, a solid v15 in a single session, and Hamish Mcarthur sending big Z v16 in 3 sessions.
How many doors you got Will?
😂
Old English apartment hallways be like that.
Lol, I'm guessing one for each room?
(context, V11-12 climber) In terms of "taking" the higher grade when I gave it a personal down grade, I personally do. I will ultimately just say "I did Boulder A" instead of "I did Boulder A, VX" but in terms of tracking my progress, I will take the consensus. I kind of round up when THINKING about my own progress in terms of personal upgrades because that at least gets filtered into my brain as a "hard end of the VX range". While I will tell others I did VX instead of VX+1, it marks more significant progress as a climber because I overcame something that was disproportionally harder for me than others.
One other detail I'll mention is that hold DO get wrose/better as time goes on. That tends to be extremely polarizing in my experience, as while the thought process of "the boulder was VX before the hold got better, therefore the boulder is not VX-1" seems logical, it may not ALYWAYS be the case, but rhetorically that gets tricky because people don't want to claim the same accomplishments when their experience was objectively easier. Grades are ranges, and sometimes a single hold getting worse/better can move a grade, but sometimes not.
Here in the climbing gym people can write down their suggestion for the grade of routes. We get wildly different grade suggestions. One and the same route can have several people who say 6c while many others say 7a. And that’s with the nice, controlled conditions of a gym and with much fewer beta options than on real rock. So if dozens of people can’t agree on the grade of easier routes, why would we expect the few people who’ve climbed the world’s hardest routes and boulders to agree?
Grades are subjective, more than anything, as a result of morphological variability.
Well said.
Twenty cents worth of ten cent words. I remember when I used to do that. Those were the days.
Does anyone know what the other V16 was when AO sent Terranova and proposed it as a grade?
Gioia?
@@Imthedragonreborn Right!
the way alex megos climbed bibliographie it is for sure 9c. but overall others found the easier beta + kneepads.
They also kind of take A D tour while Megos went straight.
there should just be a "kneepad grade" and a "barefoot grade"
@@16m49x3barefoot is for cornballs
@@16m49x3 And a no hands grade! And a no hands no feet grade!
If only 5 people in the world can do a problem, then the grade is irrelevant to the rest of us, especially those of us who climb several magnitudes below that level. Such discussions only REALLY are relevant to those who have a chance of doing these things.
And to us who can admire the feat. Admire the hardest climbs and the strongest climbers in the world. We should probably pay less attention to grades in our own recreation, but I am glad will takes grading seriously, it really is an honour system. The only difference between a 9A boulder and a 2 hour maraton is the sport and the subjectivity of the measure.
Yeah I’m really tired of everyone focusing on things we will never do. V0-v10 range is far more important than the V10+ range. Anything above that is just Vhard
Yeah I agree their opinions are the only ones really relevant and valid. I recently read multiple "commentators" downplaying Sean Bailey's accomplishment because stuff didn't "look hard" and he "hadn't sent a V17 yet." So weird to me, because when he did it... he was literally climbing with another multiple v17 climber who had already worked on it with other powerhouse climbers.
I agree. I don't understand why people argue about is more a V16 or V17. As if it actually was measurable and not just based on your strenghts and weaknesses
I don't agree with the concept of "easier" beta. One person's easier beta might not be easier for someone else. If you're tall, a high foot option might not be possible, so you're forced to reach. But then if you're short, maybe you can't reach, so you have to find a bad intermidiate, etc. Grading in climbing is inherently flawed and prone to being inaccurate because climbing is subjective by nature.
I agree grades are flawed but they offer the best guess to guide a climber on what they might try on a trip. I totally think easier beta is a thing, especially with FAs or climbs with little repeats due to the first ascensionist just not seeing the correct beta and climbing it a harder way
Of course, there is easier and harder beta. A grade by definition must apply to the easiest beta, otherwise we can just throw them out of the window completely. There is always a harder way to do something.
Of course, grading the "easiest" beta has limitations. Being morpho gets the most attention, but style is just as important. Just because someone climbs a certain grade on overhanging crimps, it does not make them climb the same grade on a slab or crack. Grading is just an orientation of what makes sense to try (in sport climbing or bouldering) or what is reasonably safe to try (in mountaineering and alpine climbing). But for that orientation to work, we have to assume the easiest beta.
(This also shows how a grade can feel much different in alpine climbing. You are effectively onsighting everything without any time for working the beta. One might even be a few meters off the route without noticing until it gets much harder)
? What are eliminates if not just forcing a harder beta onto an existing climb?
Grades are still necessary because we only have so much time and investing that time correctly is important
Understand what you're saying but there can totally be objectively easier beta.
I think what you're really getting at is that climbing grades are really constructed based on avg white male morphology which in many ways ignores the variance of difficulty individuals feel when doing different types of moves.
My opinion: Grades should be used as a rough indicator on which problems are worth your time and effort to check out. Your personal attributes will make it feel harder or easier or about what you expect. Goals should be based on enjoyment / challenge and not on an arbitrary number some random people decided felt right.
What a lot of the internet dialoguists seems to struggle with is that grades are definitely subjective.... but the subjects who get to have an opinion are people who can climb stuff in this range of difficulty. It's so strange to hear random people with such intense opinions about this stuff.
Suffering from success
The worst thing about grades are the non-pros like myself and just can't not talk about their oppinion on a grade without climbing... Just shut up until you have climbed it bro, that's what the pros do, they might say how a climb feels to them when climbing it but don't say grades until they have sent it.
That said I have to say most of these grades discussions come from admiration and passion... If people are not passionate about the sport and their idols, then they probably wouldn't spend time discussing grades.
"Nature has no preferred way of being described."- Richard Rorty
Caveat- but WE do
8 sessions and still far away....sounds pretty 9A at least then.
I think it's still too early to talk about upgrading. 8 sessions isn't a lot compared to what Nalle put into Burden or Daniel put into Return. If Will puts 15+ days into it then we can start to speculate it's probably V17 (at least for Will)
But you have to keep in mind that doing the first ascention takes longer then repeating it. Beta is already there.
@@mauricereschke9318 The beta being out there is important, as you said, but also the mere notion that something is possible really effects the mental said of things.
@@pawtuckawaybouldering2015it is alot. I did the numbers some while ago.
This silly human obsession with the "single grade" phenomenon, and subsequent "downgrading" is astounding and I can't believe we are still here...almost like we WANT something to argue about and not advance the system? This trivial issue could be solved if we finally did away with this silly single "V" grade, which was "created" by some old drunk dude in the 70's or 80's, and admit that it's ok to embrace a more accurate system spanning multiple grades (if we MUST continue to use this V grade thing) via a color system, or something similar (like we do in modern climbing gyms). There is no "one grade" and never will be...that's like saying all humans possess the exact same shaped nose.
Personally I’m often surprised how accurate grades can be. I think the inherent limitations of subjective grades are obvious and won’t change if you use colors instead of numbers or reduce the granularity.