Reply To: First Ascent Protection

Kris – I’m saying if the static is there so climber has the option to grad it, which is much easier than trying to grab a bolt. So commitment is lower.

Roo – now that I have thought about it further, basically the FA all boils down to who gets their name in guidebook, e.g. “FA: Evil Karneavil, 1/6/66”.

If it was not for this issue then a toproped first ascent is a first ascent, I mean it is 1st and it is an ascent! An ascent by any other means (incl static), as long as it is first and is an ascent, is also a “first ascent”.

So does this mean that anything goes as far as guidebooks are concerned?

I think not and the reason is that climbing (to me) is all about STYLE. I mean you can hike El Cap up a walking trail if you want, no need to suffer the head wall. Churchman’s has a perfectly good walking path to the top. So rock climbing is about seeking ARTIFICIALLY difficult ways to the top (I’m not talking Everest or peakbagging here). This articial difficulty increases from toproping to sport, to trad to soloing (for same Aust grade). So we draw a totally artifical line in the artificial sand that is rock climbing and say that, to reward style, a guidebook FA can be claimed only by people who lead or solo the thing and leading trumps toproping or slings. If you poll the climbers who have been around for a few years I’m sure 90% will back me up. Of course to any new climbers all this will seem totally ambiguous because it is.

And on a separate note, who wants to drag around 20m of static for protection so they can “lead”, either bolt the thing for me or I expect to be able to trad it.

And you can toprope a 60m climb on a 60m rope so no real need for a new style around Perth anyway…

That’s my 5c worth.