[Closed] Those climbers on El Capitan, Yosemite...

That'll be me then. Honestly I don't see the point sticking on the Telly - Joe Public won't have the faintest idea if it's impressive or not. I say this as an ex (keen) rock climber.

The surroundings, the exposure, the height, the sleeping in a tent tied to a cliff. All of this will be pretty impressive to just about anyone. Of course only folks in the same sphere will understand the challenges of it on a technical level.
Plus of course, it makes a change from the usual news of people killing each other to death...

I know nowt about climbing, but have stood under El Capitan and seen tiny little dots of humans up there and it's frikkin big!..

What do they do for the toilet?
😕

What do they do for the toilet?

Go in something similar to this.

[img] [/img]

Hamster optional for extra gnarr.

I'm getting a bit jaded by the constant stream of information about this, but every so often I have to remind myself how utterly huge this route is.

It's been Caldwell's project for years and contains 6 pitches rated 5.14 (French grade 8c+ and above), and 9 pitches rated 5.13 (8a+ to 8b+). None of the other hard free routes on El Capitan have more than one or two 5.13 pitches, I think. It's another world in terms of difficulty.

It's not that long ago that climbing any single short 5.15/8c+ route at ground level would put someone amongst the best climbers in the world.

It'll be quite a while before this gets repeated, and I strongly doubt that anyone is going to make significant improvements on the style of ascent for a long time. (Obviously some 13-year old girl will flash it in three days next year now I've said that)

It's not that long ago that climbing any single short 5.15/8c+ route at ground level would put someone amongst the best climbers in the world.

Without wanting to make you feel old, it's 20 years...

There are some tips on 'vertical relief' [url= http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/climbingtrash.htm ]here[/url]

Basically you poo in a used water bottle or a 'poop-tube'. Apparently it can be done from a hanging belay with some 'practice'. I'm not sure that's something I'd like to master through trial and error 😯

Basically you poo in a used water bottle or a 'poop-tube'.

Or if you're very brave, a well rolled dry bag.

Yeah, but are they any good on grit? 😉

Yeah, but are they any good on grit?

Jorgeson's not too bad...

cojones the size of a football - so after coming a few inches from decking he then proceeds to climb past the point he fell without putting any more protection in 😯

Putting more protection in on the that route isn't an option, so yes, very ballsy. Although considering the sort of thing Honnold et al do a 25ft ground fall is probably not that scary to these guys.

so after coming a few inches from decking he then proceeds to climb past the point he fell without putting any more protection in

25ft ground fall is probably not that scary to these guys

A 25ft ground fall can kill you just as much as a 2000ft ground fall - I suspect the ability to rationalise that is part of the reason they are able to do what they do.

[quote=lemonysam ]On Gaia? That is the only gear you can get, see also Jean-minh Trin-Thieu.

I presumed that was the case at E7 6b, but it doesn't stop it being ballsy. The description in the guidebook I have is:

"The steep shallow groove in the front face looks, and is terrifying. Exit right in a serious position."

To be fair, he was penduluming in his fall when he came closest to the ground, so not quite that close to a ground fall.

Oh, and I've just realised his belayer is running away as he falls to stop him decking!

Have they pre-placed gear on some sections on some pitches? Some pics show gear well above the lead climber. Route looks epic.

Assume there is plenty there that has been installed by others, but that the criteria for this attempt require that they only use what they place?

They've hand-drilled some bolts, and placed other gear on abseil or previous attempts. Doesn't mean it's anywhere near safe as houses though - read something about doing some of the pitches on 'body-weight only' placements, which basically means it's more than likely to rip if you do more than just ease your weight onto it.

Which can mean taking some looooong falls if you ping off at the wrong moment.

Enjoyed the Reel-rock film at New Year which gave a lot of history of Yosemite climbing. There always were nutters and still are.

This has kinda passed me by as I don't follow the climbing media much now, so without want to open a can of ethical worms,

and placed other gear on abseil

TBH there is preplaced gear on every route on El Cap. A lot of it would be fixed gear like pegs, or very hard/impossible to place on a clean lead, anyhow. So one way or another you'd have to fix the pitches then try to free them.

I think the focus here is more 'one push' than 'ground up'. Redpointing all the pitches in one outing, albeit a very long outing, would be a hell of an achievement.

Arh thanks, I had assumed it was a new route.

[quote=The Swedish Chef ]

and placed other gear on abseil

Not really any different to using bolts, which is standard practice in the US (and most of the rest of the world). It's really only in the UK where such a big thing is made of placing gear as you climb.

Only a new route in the sense it's not been done free before - a long tradition of aid climbing.

I heard that they were doing some of the climbing at night when friction is further increased. Also I think they are having to climb a day then rest for 2 or 3 to allow their fingers to recover.

A 25ft ground fall can kill you just as much as a 2000ft ground fall

That's true, but the odds of surviving a 25ft fall are obviously massively better than a 2000ft one so in the whole chance of death risk assessment it's one they probably wouldn't think too long about. Not that I'm trying to diminish it. When you hear Johnny Dawes talk about how scared he was on the top move the mind boggles at a flash attempt.

Interesting short interview/article with Alex Honnold (an amazing climber, check out some of his free soloing stuff if you din't know about him) talking about the climb here.... [url= http://www.mensjournal.com/adventure/races-sports/alex-honnold-on-the-dawn-wall-climb-20150112 ]Linky[/url]

I find it interesting how even though El Cap is probably the most famous climbing cliff in the world, very few people actually try free climbing any of the routes up it (despite having grades supposedly climbable by a lot of people nowadays). For granite, the rock does have very low friction; combine this with the specialist techniques required (crack climbing!)and you have a cliff much less popular than one might suppose. The European venues I can think of that are of fantastic quality, but rarely climbed by visitors, on are The Elbsandstein in Saxony, Val di Mello in the Italian Alps and the Verdon canyon in Provence.
So, for me it is double respect for these guys as it requires special skills not just fitness to climb at any standard on that cliff.

Both just topped out. Epic effort.

Was there in October (not climbing). Watched a few groups trying it though...

[url= https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7498/16022939525_c9f85e0ce3_c.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7498/16022939525_c9f85e0ce3_c.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/qpTKG2 ]California and Yosemite-7.jpg[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/people/7509988@N07/ ]Kit Carruthers[/url], on Flickr

I don't get what all the fuss is about?

As I see it they have fallen several times on the way up and the ropes saved them, therefore had it not been for the ropes they would have died and have not completed the route. So, they are neither free climbing/soloing or aid climbing?

Fair play to them I wouldn't/couldn't do it!

"Clearly you are not a golfer".

So, they are neither free climbing/soloing or aid climbing?

They are free climbing, which means that they are only holding onto the rock, and the equippment they use is only to save them from death. As opposed to aid climbing, where you stick bits of metal into the rock and then use those as handholds. In the UK that's considered cheating.

It's 'just' something incredibly hard that's never been done before, that's all.

I don't get what all the fuss is about?

As I see it they have fallen several times on the way up and the ropes saved them, therefore had it not been for the ropes they would have died and have not completed the route. So, they are neither free climbing/soloing or aid climbing?

Obv you're not a climber, but the fuss is because they've just freed a particularly hard route on el cap.

I'm not sure why the mainstream media is all over it though, since this particular ascent is probably only really significant to climbers. Must just have been well PRed and media jumped on.

I think Alex Honnold has probably skewed the general public's perception of hard climbing.

On some of the video feed I saw, one of the blokes seemed to be leaning back on the rope and letting it take the strain. Looked like he was using it as to get some brief rest from clinging on to the wall. Is that "allowed" when free climbing ?

Free climbing just means no aid (ie no pulling on stuff that isn't rock).

I doubt they'll be arsed about not being able to claim an "onsight" of dawn wall. ie climbing route without falling or resting on first attempt with no knowledge of the route (save for guidebook stuff).

As I just said a couple of posts up "I think Alex Honnold has probably skewed the general public's perception of hard climbing."

What allthepies said, I saw that photo too. What they have done is an achievement but seems a bit hyped up. If I may I'll compare it to climbing the North Face of the Eiger, the first ascent took 3 days. Now Ueli Steck can do it in 3 hours, free climbing it, no safety ropes.

Looked like he was using it as to get some brief rest from clinging on to the wall. Is that "allowed" when free climbing ?

Well it sort of counts against you - you don't get as much kudos as doing something 'clean' - but in this case that is outweighed by the incredible achievement. These two aren't short of kudos 🙂

If I may I'll compare it to climbing the North Face of the Eiger, the first ascent took 3 days

Not really the same thing. Modern climbing standards are vastly higher than they were in those days.

I don't get what all the fuss is about?

It's a matter of style. in order of style it goes something like this:

1. Climb the route any way possible using equipment to aid you - aka aid climbing.
2. Climb the route using only your body to make progress but using ropes etc for safety, but allowing falls and siege tactics (re-supplies, abbing up and down from a camp/base station) - aka Free climbing
3. Climb the route in one push using equipment only to protect you and allowing falls
4. Climb the route in one push with no falls but still using equipment for safety
5. Climb the route in one push with no prior knowledge with but allowing falls - on sight free climbing.
6. Climb the route in one push with no falls or prior knowledge - on-sight flash
7. Climb the route with no ropes but with prior practice - solo
8. Climb the route with no ropes and no prior knowledge - on-sight solo

That's obviously not exhaustive but the general idea. The difficulty of the route usually decreases as you go down the list. These guys are doing something like no 2, which is why the emphasis is on the difficulty, and in technical terms it is ridiculously hard. Imagine climbing up an overhanging wall on hand and foot-holds not much bigger or thicker than 2 pound coin.

Now Ueli Steck can do it in 3 hours, free climbing it, no safety ropes.

Generally, the use of ropes is inversely correlated with the technical difficulty and danger of a route.

Steck/Honnold aren't soloing stuff like Dawn Wall.

Though the North Face of the Eiger will always be a far more serious undertaking than anything on El Cap, purely becuase of the subjective danger - poor rock/snow/ice, falling rock, frequent appalling weather. Given the equipment of the day those early ascents were breathtakingly bold.

Which is why I earlier wondered why the media were getting all excited about this one. Impressive technical climbing yes. But...

Impressive technical climbing yes. But...

But what?

Does Joe Public appreciate the technical difficulty? I doubt it. It might impress rock climbers - though personally I've always been a fan of the lightweight approach of guys like Mick Fowler whether it's Scottich winter climbing, alpinism or Himalayan. I'm not keen on seige tactics (that's so 50s, 60s and 70s darling). OK, they've freed another line but I don't find it as compelling as a Livesey or Dawes ascent.

Massive technical or endurance achievements in other sports can get attention even when there is zero or relatively little objective danger. The technical skill of a golfer, boxer or cricketer can make them a legend and sprout hundreds of column inches.

We may be used to associating climbing achievements with boldness and risk of death, but climbing is a very varied sport, with extreme soloing and high altitude mountaineering at one end, and incredible difficulty but relatively little risk at the other.

These guys are climbing pitch after pitch at a level of difficulty that is hard to explain to a layman.

This is a 9a pitch, one of the first, if not the first to be climbed in Europe:

On Dawn Wall, there are two pitches graded at this level of difficulty (although being less steep, their character will be slightly different), and a total of seven at approximately 8c or above. Another 11 pitches are 8a or above. Doing these in one effort from valley to rim is mindblowing stuff.

Which is why I earlier wondered why the media were getting all excited about this one. Impressive technical climbing yes. But...

The trouble is the media, and most non-climbers don't understand it. They obsess about hardest and most dangerous, and assume the two go hand in hand when in reality it's much more complicated. Some climbs are celebrated because they raise the bar in technical difficulty, speed, style, boldness, novelty, and a combination of some or all of these factors. In this case the focus is on difficulty and novelty. And conversely, the climbs Steck and Honnold etc have done are celebrated for their boldness, speed and style.

What they have done is an achievement but seems a bit hyped up. If I may I'll compare it to climbing the North Face of the Eiger, the first ascent took 3 days. Now Ueli Steck can do it in 3 hours, free climbing it, no safety ropes.

I have absolutely no idea how you think this makes Dawn Wall a less impressive achievement. Ueli Steck can run up the Eiger because in technical terms it's barely on the radar. It's not even a remotely comparable climbing achievement.

Dawn Wall is getting the coverage because it's amazingly hard climbing in a stunningly beautiful, iconic and instantly recognisable location which has been recorded in a way that no major mountaineering feat has been for decades and which the sponsors have PR managed exceptionally well. None of which takes away from the fact that it's one of the most impressive pieces of climbing in recent memory and which has dragged climbing on probably the most famous cliff in the world slap bang into the 21st century.

OK, they've freed another line but I don't find it as compelling as a Livesey or Dawes ascent.

Christ - So this shouldn't get coverage because Johnny Dawes climbed something completely different and in a completely different style 30 years ago?

which the sponsors have PR managed exceptionally well.

/end of thread...

The comparisons to Livesey and Dawes are amusing. They're both very iconic and impressive climbers in their own right. But comparing their climbs to this is like comparing Dowhill MTB to trials. For instance, Dawes' most celebrated climb, Indian Face on Snowdown has a technical difficulty about 6 grades lower than this, and was 2 hard pitches and not 20. But it is iconic because it was climbed in a style where if he'd fallen off at most difficult section, he'd have hit the ground from 200ft up. Even today that climb has only had 4 repeats in the intervening 30 years (I think) which tells you something about how far ahead of it's time it was. This climb is similar in the way it has massively raised the standard for that climbing style, but in all other ways they couldn't be more different.