Log in

No account? Create an account
bear by san

March 2017



Powered by LiveJournal.com

i wanna know right now.


So we went to the more-bouldery gym today because our regular gym is closed for renovation.

Gah. I will never complain about the upper body work at Prime Climb again. :-P I'm sorry, but one should not have to smear three feet from foothold to foothold up an alleged 5.4 on vertical from one good handhold.

I finished a 5.6 (which was a really fun/tricky climb requiring a heck of a lot of pauses to rest, because of above-mentioned need for brute force) and tried another 5.6, which I finally gave up and cheated on because I wanted the exercise of topping out. I also di a 5.4 and found I had to cheat to finish another one, because I'm sorry. If it's got four-foot gaps between the holds, I don't care how good the holds are. It's not really a 5.4.

There was an extremely cute and very helpful shirtless bouldering boy with bleached and punked out hair and 1.7% body fat, though, which makes up for a lot.

I think I'll drink a lot of tea now.


If it's got four-foot gaps between the holds, I don't care how good the holds are. It's not really a 5.4.

Thank you! We are having this exact same argument with the route-setter at our gym. Hello Routesetter! You are an 18-yr-old boy with a 72" ape index. You are not normal! Grah!

Sorry. Had to get that off my chest.

Stay strong, sister. *powerfist*
Hee. Yeah. Sweetie, easy for you, who climbs 5.13s without breaking a sweat, is not *easy*.
Hah! I believe you may have me confused with someone else.

Besides which, life ain't easy when you're 4'10". This is why I continually plot against the 18-year-old routesetter with the 72" wingspan.
No, no, the object of that comment is the hypothetical gorilla routesetter.
Aha! That makes much more sense.

Data point!

Hi, I don't know you- I'm just randomly reading friends-of-friends-of-friends- but I'm a climber, too. I've had almost the exact same experience with the ratings at a bouldering-oriented gym. The wall routes were totally sandbagged and the boulder routes much the opposite (heliumbagged?), like, the V0's were easier than the 5.4's. I wonder if that's the norm for bouldering gyms.

Re: Data point!

Yeah. I climb about 5.7s at my regular gym, which has a rep for being on the hard side (and is, compared to other gyms I've been to around the country, indeed about maybe half a grade harder.)

And here I was thrashing on a 5.6. :-P Criky, people. Have a little pity on the chicks.
Do you think you could air-mail the bouldering boy to me? Kthanx.
Get your own! *g*
Well, if you could kindly direct me to a local seller, I would! XP
one point seven percent?

give that dude a cheeseburger, for the love of muffins.
I would have him lay on my lap and feed him rich chocolates while I caress his bleached hair...*sound of harp strings breaking*
The more I hear, the more I appreciate the routesetters at the bouldering place I go to, who set problems that are:

a) physically possible (with some work) for someone climbing at that grade, even me, and;

b) mentally twisty (the hold that is perfectly reachable if you lean all the way back -- ignoring the screeching of your hindbrain -- to brace a hand on an adjoining wall; the move that's only do-able if you got your feet switched round three moves previously, etc.).

They clearly put real effort into creating thinky problems even for the beginner's grades. And this is despite the fact that they are lemur-like boys whom I have seen scamper up a wall because it's quicker for them to get up to the balcony that way than to go round to the stairs.

OK, so mark this as the day I realied all these climbs you talk about take place in gyms, not out in the wopwops. Goodbye, mental images of matociquala buch-womaning it up on rugged cliff-faces, miles from civilisations ... :D *smites self on forehead*
When I say "We went climbing outdoors," I'm usually talking about outdoors. When I say, "We went to the gym," It's more often the gym. *g*
I believe those are what we call "subtle clues".
Aaah, excellent. The confusion is settling, and I really must work on my reading comprehension one of these days ...
I'm thinking that there may be advantages to the totally crazy grading systems* used in this country, after all: I have no idea how hard I was supposed to find the problems at the all-bouldering place. I just looked up the colour for the easiest couple of series, started from there, and climbed until I'd had enough.

I don't know how hard a 5.4 is supposed to be compared to what I can do, but four feet between holds is going to be pretty reachy, unless you've got some handy features or a good slab. Was it like that all the way up?

*They all look completely logical on their own. It's the combination that's confusing me.
5.4 is supposed to be a beginner route.

This as not. *g*
Yikes, hadn't realized the grading systems were *that* crazy; "5.4" on its own sounds like middle, or maybe low-end-of-high-end, to me. That's supposed to be a beginner route? What do they use numbers like "1", "2", "3", and "4" for?

Oh, wait, maybe the system got combined with an ADA accessibility index, so a ramp with handrails is a "1.1", and stairs are a "3" if the handrails are good?
It's not crazy at all. 1 is a flat, level walk suitable for small dogs and old people. 4 is a scramble over rocks.

Anything beginning with a 5 is a technical climb requiring protection. Those range from 5.1 (easiest) to 5.15 or so. (Originally, the ratings only went as high as 5.10, but technology and technique have improved.)

Now I'm having AD&D (original) flashbacks. 18/75 climbing strength!
Route-setter = dungeonmaster. It all fits.

*totally failed my saving throw for Avoid Sprained Ankle, dammit*