Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Outside Online)   Climbing duo bags Yosemite's Triple Crown--El Capitan, Half Dome, and Mt. Watkins. And they do it free--using ropes only for safety. Oh, and they do it in less than 24 hours, including travel time between routes   (outsideonline.com ) divider line
    More: Hero, triple crown, El Capitan, Half Dome  
•       •       •

763 clicks; posted to Sports » on 22 May 2012 at 11:08 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



59 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-05-22 11:19:05 AM  
Oh ya? Well I had to work on a troublesome bathroom sink clog. Had to snake it out and everything.

Plumbing is much worse.
 
2012-05-22 11:31:47 AM  
Meh; Get back to me when they free solo all three routes...while tethered to each other.
 
2012-05-22 11:32:33 AM  
So "free"as in normal rock climbing. Don't use free unless you mean free soloing subby.
 
2012-05-22 11:40:08 AM  
Isn't part of El Capitan impossible without a rope to swing out to a crack on? I watched a documentary on it and stuff once.

/Impressive climbing regardless
 
2012-05-22 11:47:58 AM  

squegeebooo: So "free"as in normal rock climbing. Don't use free unless you mean free soloing subby.


In normal climbing you can use the rope to pull yourself up and use various gear to make things easier. In free climbing the rope and whatever gear you use to fix it with are for safety only not to aid the climbing.

NkThrasher: Isn't part of El Capitan impossible without a rope to swing out to a crack on?


There's more than one route up El Capitain.
 
2012-05-22 11:57:11 AM  
Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't sound very fun/rewarding. I just don't get the "WOO! I just did (X)hike in (Y)hours!" mentality.
 
2012-05-22 12:02:47 PM  
Ooooooooooooh, I hates that rabbit.
 
2012-05-22 12:03:09 PM  

WhyteRaven74: There's more than one route up El Capitain.


Fair enough then.

Hot Tamale on a Cold Night: I just don't get the "WOO! I just did (X)hike in (Y)hours!" mentality.


It's the extension of pushing yourself at a given activity. It's no different than seeking to solve Su Do Ku faster, doing a speed run of a video game boss / entire game, finding the optimal route to take to work to avoid traffic / lights, etc etc etc.

I don't like optimizing hiking for time, but I can understand why people might want to. I enjoy it more when I'm not running ragged.
 
2012-05-22 12:04:49 PM  

WhyteRaven74: squegeebooo: So "free"as in normal rock climbing. Don't use free unless you mean free soloing subby.

In normal climbing you can use the rope to pull yourself up and use various gear to make things easier. In free climbing the rope and whatever gear you use to fix it with are for safety only not to aid the climbing.

NkThrasher: Isn't part of El Capitan impossible without a rope to swing out to a crack on?

There's more than one route up El Capitain.


Then you're lazy and sound fat. Normal climbing is free climbing. Free solo and assisted are the ones that need to be spelled out.
 
2012-05-22 12:04:55 PM  

squegeebooo: So "free"as in normal rock climbing. Don't use free unless you mean free soloing subby.


free ≠ free solo.
 
2012-05-22 12:11:28 PM  
www.racprops.com

Impressed.

/THIS may be the record that Spock mentions that Kirk is "in no danger of breaking"
//mind = blown
 
2012-05-22 12:27:43 PM  

squegeebooo: So "free"as in normal rock climbing. Don't use free unless you mean free soloing subby.


Know how I know you've never climbed before?
 
2012-05-22 12:30:39 PM  

wiredroach: squegeebooo: So "free"as in normal rock climbing. Don't use free unless you mean free soloing subby.

free ≠ free solo.


I'm aware. But its like saying snow skiing. The snow is implied, you only have to call out the type when it's water skiing.

Free climbing is just climbing, you don't need the free, once people see it they assume you meant free solo.
 
2012-05-22 12:30:41 PM  

Hot Tamale on a Cold Night: Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't sound very fun/rewarding. I just don't get the "WOO! I just did (X)hike in (Y)hours!" mentality.


The rewarding part is turning your nose up at less experienced climbers and others who don't do it. Trust me, I see it all the time.

example:

squegeebooo: Then you're lazy and sound fat.


and so forth...
 
2012-05-22 12:33:22 PM  

S.A.S.Q.U.A.T.C.H.: Hot Tamale on a Cold Night: Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't sound very fun/rewarding. I just don't get the "WOO! I just did (X)hike in (Y)hours!" mentality.

The rewarding part is turning your nose up at less experienced climbers and others who don't do it. Trust me, I see it all the time.

example:
squegeebooo: Then you're lazy and sound fat.

and so forth...


Much like road cycling.
 
2012-05-22 12:43:16 PM  

squegeebooo: I'm aware. But its like saying snow skiing. The snow is implied, you only have to call out the type when it's water skiing.

Free climbing is just climbing, you don't need the free, once people see it they assume you meant free solo.


No. Free climbing means using ropes for protection, not ascent. "Free solo" is not implied by "free climbing." Free solo is the exception and should be specified as such. And in Yosemite, "normal" climbing isn't necessarily "free" climbing because so many of the trad routes rely on direct aid (not "assisted" climbing, as you'd have it). The article itself uses the term "free" correctly, and goes to some pains to draw the distinction between a free ascent and an aided ascent. No mention is made of free soloing because it's not part of the story, although Alex Honnold is the current world champion of the art until he quits or falls.
 
2012-05-22 12:49:41 PM  
Alex Honnold?

Knew he had to be involved. I am guessing they simul-climbed a lot of pitches. This is far more interesting than the Everest dreck.

The free climb designation is important as that would mean the found a way to avoid the rope swings (technically A0) on the climb(s).
 
2012-05-22 12:55:24 PM  
Good for this guy! I'm as excited to know about the accomplishments that would have been just as enjoyable to him if enjoyed internally as I am hearing about the religious guy talk about how awesome god is in his life. You did a thing! Congrats!
 
2012-05-22 12:57:39 PM  
Travel time between routes?

Does the submitter know that all three of these features are within five miles of one another?
 
2012-05-22 12:58:41 PM  
Hero tag? I suppose this is cool or spiffy, but heroic? C'mon
 
2012-05-22 01:05:37 PM  

wiredroach: squegeebooo: I'm aware. But its like saying snow skiing. The snow is implied, you only have to call out the type when it's water skiing.

Free climbing is just climbing, you don't need the free, once people see it they assume you meant free solo.

No. Free climbing means using ropes for protection, not ascent. "Free solo" is not implied by "free climbing." Free solo is the exception and should be specified as such. And in Yosemite, "normal" climbing isn't necessarily "free" climbing because so many of the trad routes rely on direct aid (not "assisted" climbing, as you'd have it). The article itself uses the term "free" correctly, and goes to some pains to draw the distinction between a free ascent and an aided ascent. No mention is made of free soloing because it's not part of the story, although Alex Honnold is the current world champion of the art until he quits or falls.


The article goes to no pains, while it does mention free, your forced headline goes to pains.

I was unaware most cap climbs were aid for at least a smidge, but I can't admit being wrong in general, this is fark.
 
2012-05-22 01:05:41 PM  
Richard Sauce

Hero tag? I suppose this is cool or spiffy, but heroic? C'mon

This.
 
2012-05-22 01:06:57 PM  

bigpete53: Travel time between routes?

Does the submitter know that all three of these features are within five miles of one another?


Yes, but as the article states: "Besides the 77 pitches of climbing, the linkup includes several hours of hiking just to approach and descend from the routes." It's not like they just drove the car from the end of one to the start of the next. And the climbing routes themselves take most groups multiple days each to climb. So it's pretty impressive.
 
2012-05-22 01:08:32 PM  

squegeebooo: The article goes to no pains, while it does mention free, your forced headline goes to pains.

I was unaware most cap climbs were aid for at least a smidge, but I can't admit being wrong in general, this is fark.


It's glorious to watch someone be willfully wrong. Did you work in the Bush administration?
 
2012-05-22 01:13:19 PM  

wiredroach: squegeebooo: The article goes to no pains, while it does mention free, your forced headline goes to pains.

I was unaware most cap climbs were aid for at least a smidge, but I can't admit being wrong in general, this is fark.

It's glorious to watch someone be willfully wrong. Did you work in the Bush administration?


Willfully wrong how, free climbing is the most common form off climbing and there for doesn't need to be called out, just climbing will suffice. Adding in free makes most people jump to free solo. Causing at least a re read if not further confusion.
 
2012-05-22 01:15:16 PM  
To quote wikipedia
" While clear in its contrast to aid climbing, the term free climbing is nonetheless prone to misunderstanding and misuse.

The two most common errors are:

Confusing free climbing with its subset free soloing, a willfully risk-taking endeavor involving climbing with just one's hands, feet, and body without any rope or protective equipment Conflating soloing a free climb with free soloing, "soloing" alone meaning merely to climb with no partner, which depending on the difficulty of the route can be done safely using any of a number of self-belaying systems."
 
2012-05-22 01:19:07 PM  

wiredroach: Yes, but as the article states: "Besides the 77 pitches of climbing, the linkup includes several hours of hiking just to approach and descend from the routes." It's not like they just drove the car from the end of one to the start of the next. And the climbing routes themselves take most groups multiple days each to climb. So it's pretty impressive.


I think it's impressive to make the climbs in one day, but they just aren't far apart. "Several" could easily mean "three." Yes, I have climbed two of the three.
 
2012-05-22 01:52:34 PM  
This thread is doing wonders to enforce my existing opinion that climbing would be really awesomely fun if it wasn't for the general douchebaggery of climbers. I'm hard pressed to think of another activity where the enthusiasts so actively discourage others from taking it up through elitism and mockery.
 
2012-05-22 01:52:40 PM  

squegeebooo: So "free"as in normal rock climbing. Don't use free unless you mean free soloing subby.


free != free solo

both are valid terms, as far as I'm aware.
 
2012-05-22 01:58:29 PM  

squegeebooo: To quote wikipedia
" While clear in its contrast to aid climbing, the term free climbing is nonetheless prone to misunderstanding and misuse.

The two most common errors are:

Confusing free climbing with its subset free soloing, a willfully risk-taking endeavor involving climbing with just one's hands, feet, and body without any rope or protective equipment Conflating soloing a free climb with free soloing, "soloing" alone meaning merely to climb with no partner, which depending on the difficulty of the route can be done safely using any of a number of self-belaying systems."


Just because a term can be misunderstood doesn't make it incorrect. Your initial comment in the thread clearly indicates that you thought "free" meant "free solo." Outside's readers are more likely to know the difference, and the headline's use of the term is correct and germane to the story. You say that "climbing" should suffice but clearly that's not true. If you say you "climbed" El Cap, no one has any clue if you did it free or aided--but they almost certainly wouldn't think you meant a free solo in any event.
 
2012-05-22 02:04:07 PM  

wiredroach: squegeebooo: To quote wikipedia
" While clear in its contrast to aid climbing, the term free climbing is nonetheless prone to misunderstanding and misuse.

The two most common errors are:

Confusing free climbing with its subset free soloing, a willfully risk-taking endeavor involving climbing with just one's hands, feet, and body without any rope or protective equipment Conflating soloing a free climb with free soloing, "soloing" alone meaning merely to climb with no partner, which depending on the difficulty of the route can be done safely using any of a number of self-belaying systems."

Just because a term can be misunderstood doesn't make it incorrect. Your initial comment in the thread clearly indicates that you thought "free" meant "free solo." Outside's readers are more likely to know the difference, and the headline's use of the term is correct and germane to the story. You say that "climbing" should suffice but clearly that's not true. If you say you "climbed" El Cap, no one has any clue if you did it free or aided--but they almost certainly wouldn't think you meant a free solo in any event.


My Weeners was just about the confusion you may cause by using free, not my own confusion, now I'm just trolling.
 
2012-05-22 02:06:19 PM  

Huck Chaser: This thread is doing wonders to enforce my existing opinion that climbing would be really awesomely fun if it wasn't for the general douchebaggery of climbers. I'm hard pressed to think of another activity where the enthusiasts so actively discourage others from taking it up through elitism and mockery.


I haven't climbed in years and only did it causally because my rents were super into it, don't let one troll stop you from trying something awesome. Nearly everyone in the community who are willing to help new people are awesome.
 
2012-05-22 02:07:34 PM  

squegeebooo: My Weeners was just about the confusion you may cause by using free, not my own confusion, now I'm just trolling.


I'm not sure how this part of the headline is confusing: "And they do it free--using ropes only for safety."

...and I love it when the initial comment filter works its magic.
 
2012-05-22 02:13:07 PM  
Climbing duo bags Yosemite's Triple Crown--El Capitan, Half Dome, and Mt. Watkins. And they do it free--using ropes only for safety. Oh, and they do it in less than 24 hours, including travel time between routes


Pussies.

"using ropes only for safety" is still using ropes.

/seen half dome, and yes I am completely kidding.
 
2012-05-22 02:13:49 PM  

wiredroach: squegeebooo: My Weeners was just about the confusion you may cause by using free, not my own confusion, now I'm just trolling.

I'm not sure how this part of the headline is confusing: "And they do it free--using ropes only for safety."

...and I love it when the initial comment filter works its magic.


You had to specifically call out that free didn't mean free solo. If you had just said climbing or perhaps non aid assisted, you wouldn't need that entire clumsy middle chunk.
 
2012-05-22 02:20:01 PM  

squegeebooo: You had to specifically call out that free didn't mean free solo.


No, that's used to indicate that it wasn't aid climbed...the same distinction the article makes. That's the whole point of the article; the feat had been done previously, using aid techniques. You seem to be the only one hung up on the free solo bit.
 
2012-05-22 02:25:49 PM  

wiredroach: squegeebooo: You had to specifically call out that free didn't mean free solo.

No, that's used to indicate that it wasn't aid climbed...the same distinction the article makes. That's the whole point of the article; the feat had been done previously, using aid techniques. You seem to be the only one hung up on the free solo bit.


You already said free, so we know it's not aid climbed, then you proceed to describe the kind of free it was, which you claim isn't needed because you didn't say free solo, yet you still had to put in a clarification. So you must have had concerns about people getting the terms confused, which was my point. Now I feel like your trolling me back to be missing an obvious point like this.
 
2012-05-22 02:32:27 PM  

Huck Chaser: This thread is doing wonders to enforce my existing opinion that climbing would be really awesomely fun if it wasn't for the general douchebaggery of climbers. I'm hard pressed to think of another activity where the enthusiasts so actively discourage others from taking it up through elitism and mockery.


I worked at an indoor rock wall for about 7 months (AWESOME pro-deals) and you cannot be more wrong. Climbers, in my experience, have always been courteous and respectful, especially to new climbers.
 
2012-05-22 02:36:56 PM  

squegeebooo: You already said free, so we know it's not aid climbed,


You insisted that free meant free solo in spite of the clarification in the headline, so I'm not sure why you're now claiming you knew what it actually meant. Give it up.
 
2012-05-22 02:46:22 PM  
I have a question for people who know something about climbing. (I know nothing.)

I was reading some Wikipedia articles earlier today about famous climbs (North face of the Eiger, El Capitan, etc.) and I was struck by how much work it was to climb these for the first time, compared to how "easy" it is today.

By "easy" I don't mean that it's actually easy. When it was climbed for the first time The Nose took years of trying and months of work with a "siege" approach. Today it is today zoomed up in less than three hours.

I imagine the fact that there are already anchors along the route makes it quicker for today's climbers to go up, but this doesn't help me understand the enormous difference in times.

What accounts for the advances in climbing speed? Is it new equipment? New techniques? Fitter climbers? Hundreds of small pieces of information about the route accumulated over the years by thousands of climbers ("start with your left foot for the next 10-foot section")?

A related question: if the rockface of El Capitan were to be cloned tomorrow (without the installed ropes and anchors) how fast could it be climbed?

What about a cliff "like" El Capitan, but on which no one had any experience?
 
2012-05-22 02:47:07 PM  

rudemix: Good for this guy! I'm as excited to know about the accomplishments that would have been just as enjoyable to him if enjoyed internally as I am hearing about the religious guy talk about how awesome god is in his life. You did a thing! Congrats!


the bigger question: who pooped in your coffee this morning?
 
2012-05-22 02:48:49 PM  

RichieLaw: Huck Chaser: This thread is doing wonders to enforce my existing opinion that climbing would be really awesomely fun if it wasn't for the general douchebaggery of climbers. I'm hard pressed to think of another activity where the enthusiasts so actively discourage others from taking it up through elitism and mockery.

I worked at an indoor rock wall for about 7 months (AWESOME pro-deals) and you cannot be more wrong. Climbers, in my experience, have always been courteous and respectful, especially to new climbers.


Your experience and my experience differ, obviously. I've climbed casually for about 2 years, and from what I've seen, journeyman climbers (people climbing in the 5.9-5.10 range) are very happy to help newcomers, but once climbers get some experience and are climbing 5.11a+, they stop caring about new climbers, and generally treat you like you're just getting in their way.
 
2012-05-22 02:55:35 PM  

wiredroach: squegeebooo: You already said free, so we know it's not aid climbed,

You insisted that free meant free solo in spite of the clarification in the headline, so I'm not sure why you're now claiming you knew what it actually meant. Give it up.


And you're insisting you didn't need a clarification for a regularly misinterpreted term, while having a clarification specifically to clear up any potential misunderstanding of a poorly worded headline due to the inclusion of that term.
 
2012-05-22 02:56:10 PM  

quokka70: What accounts for the advances in climbing speed? Is it new equipment? New techniques? Fitter climbers? Hundreds of small pieces of information about the route accumulated over the years by thousands of climbers ("start with your left foot for the next 10-foot section")?


All of the above...more knowledge of routes, better gear, better training, plus many, many more people doing it which means the top end of the bell curve will be more talented.
 
2012-05-22 02:57:30 PM  

quokka70: I have a question for people who know something about climbing. (I know nothing.)

I was reading some Wikipedia articles earlier today about famous climbs (North face of the Eiger, El Capitan, etc.) and I was struck by how much work it was to climb these for the first time, compared to how "easy" it is today.

By "easy" I don't mean that it's actually easy. When it was climbed for the first time The Nose took years of trying and months of work with a "siege" approach. Today it is today zoomed up in less than three hours.

I imagine the fact that there are already anchors along the route makes it quicker for today's climbers to go up, but this doesn't help me understand the enormous difference in times.

What accounts for the advances in climbing speed? Is it new equipment? New techniques? Fitter climbers? Hundreds of small pieces of information about the route accumulated over the years by thousands of climbers ("start with your left foot for the next 10-foot section")?

A related question: if the rockface of El Capitan were to be cloned tomorrow (without the installed ropes and anchors) how fast could it be climbed?

What about a cliff "like" El Capitan, but on which no one had any experience?


Mapped routes. Todays climbers know where to go, the pioneers had to try any thing that looked possible to find out what was.
 
2012-05-22 03:00:16 PM  

Huck Chaser: RichieLaw: Huck Chaser: This thread is doing wonders to enforce my existing opinion that climbing would be really awesomely fun if it wasn't for the general douchebaggery of climbers. I'm hard pressed to think of another activity where the enthusiasts so actively discourage others from taking it up through elitism and mockery.

I worked at an indoor rock wall for about 7 months (AWESOME pro-deals) and you cannot be more wrong. Climbers, in my experience, have always been courteous and respectful, especially to new climbers.

Your experience and my experience differ, obviously. I've climbed casually for about 2 years, and from what I've seen, journeyman climbers (people climbing in the 5.9-5.10 range) are very happy to help newcomers, but once climbers get some experience and are climbing 5.11a+, they stop caring about new climbers, and generally treat you like you're just getting in their way.


I think that's any activity, high end X, be it cyclists, ultimate players, volley ball etc all seem to have a higher percentage of elitists who can't be bothered or are actually annoyed to have to interact with new/weak people when doing there activity.
 
2012-05-22 03:02:23 PM  

squegeebooo: And you're insisting you didn't need a clarification for a regularly misinterpreted term, while having a clarification specifically to clear up any potential misunderstanding of a poorly worded headline due to the inclusion of that term.


I never said it didn't need clarification; just that your interpretation was bass-ackwards. My clarification stressed the distinction between aid climbing and free climbing vital to the newsworthiness of the article; once again, you're the only one who seemed to think it meant free soloing.

At any rate, I guess I'll have to defer to your lone greenlight when it comes to the finesse of crafting headlines.
 
2012-05-22 03:09:12 PM  

wiredroach: squegeebooo: And you're insisting you didn't need a clarification for a regularly misinterpreted term, while having a clarification specifically to clear up any potential misunderstanding of a poorly worded headline due to the inclusion of that term.

I never said it didn't need clarification; just that your interpretation was bass-ackwards. My clarification stressed the distinction between aid climbing and free climbing vital to the newsworthiness of the article; once again, you're the only one who seemed to think it meant free soloing.

At any rate, I guess I'll have to defer to your lone greenlight when it comes to the finesse of crafting headlines.


It's quality, not quantity, that's what I tell myself anyways.

Sadly I have neither.
 
2012-05-22 03:51:32 PM  

Huck Chaser: RichieLaw: Huck Chaser: This thread is doing wonders to enforce my existing opinion that climbing would be really awesomely fun if it wasn't for the general douchebaggery of climbers. I'm hard pressed to think of another activity where the enthusiasts so actively discourage others from taking it up through elitism and mockery.

I worked at an indoor rock wall for about 7 months (AWESOME pro-deals) and you cannot be more wrong. Climbers, in my experience, have always been courteous and respectful, especially to new climbers.

Your experience and my experience differ, obviously. I've climbed casually for about 2 years, and from what I've seen, journeyman climbers (people climbing in the 5.9-5.10 range) are very happy to help newcomers, but once climbers get some experience and are climbing 5.11a+, they stop caring about new climbers, and generally treat you like you're just getting in their way.


Yeah. I can't speak for you, and I'm sorry you had such a horrid experience, but I've found the more experienced climbers to be nicer and more comfortable helping people out. Granted, this might have been biased by the fact I worked for a climbing gym, so maybe my data points are curved.
 
2012-05-22 04:12:19 PM  
quokka70

I have a question for people who know something about climbing. (I know nothing.)

I was reading some Wikipedia articles earlier today about famous climbs (North face of the Eiger, El Capitan, etc.) and I was struck by how much work it was to climb these for the first time, compared to how "easy" it is today.

By "easy" I don't mean that it's actually easy. When it was climbed for the first time The Nose took years of trying and months of work with a "siege" approach. Today it is today zoomed up in less than three hours.

I imagine the fact that there are already anchors along the route makes it quicker for today's climbers to go up, but this doesn't help me understand the enormous difference in times.

What accounts for the advances in climbing speed? Is it new equipment? New techniques? Fitter climbers? Hundreds of small pieces of information about the route accumulated over the years by thousands of climbers ("start with your left foot for the next 10-foot section")?

A related question: if the rockface of El Capitan were to be cloned tomorrow (without the installed ropes and anchors) how fast could it be climbed?

What about a cliff "like" El Capitan, but on which no one had any experience?


Fitness, training, sticky rubber, advances in clothing, dynamic ropes, camming devices, guide books, fixed rap/belay anchors have all contributed to the rapid times we see on trade routes. This has also sped up times on wall that see little traffic and on first ascent lines (minus the fixed gear). Probably the biggest thing is the evolution of our minds and what is possible. In the thirties some guys stood at the bottom of the Eiger Nordwand and saw a wall they believed they could climb in several days, a few years ago Ueli Steck stood at the bottom and saw a wall he could free solo in under 3 hours.
As far as onsight climbing of a first ascent on a big wall just google names like Lynn Hill, Tommy Caldwell, Leo Houlding etc. to see what they are doing.
The "seige" style of climbing is pretty widely condemned by most modern climbers as it leaves a mess behind (see my Everest thread post). Modern climbers even on the biggest routes are climbing with just a partner, a rack, a rope, and a pack. Hope that helps.


Huck Chaser

This thread is doing wonders to enforce my existing opinion that climbing would be really awesomely fun if it wasn't for the general douchebaggery of climbers. I'm hard pressed to think of another activity where the enthusiasts so actively discourage others from taking it up through elitism and mockery.

I agree that climbing has its fair share of assholes. Due to my modest abilities I am sure I have been mocked by elitist jerks, I don't care. The bond I have formed with my few partners is a very strong one beyond a casual friendship, I am trusting them with my life and vice-versa. I am fortunate to climb with people who don't spray about grades or routes or how rad they are, we just simply love being in the mountains doing objectives within or just a tiny bit beyond our ability. To me it is about style, I would rather succeed in good style on a moderate route, than flail up something because it is "harder". I hope you find someone to climb with that embraces that philosophy, you may find you enjoy the "experience" far more than someone berating you for not sending a 5.12d.
 
Displayed 50 of 59 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report