UKC

Read this.

https://www.climbing.com/places/opinion-modern-gyms-fail-outdoor-climbers/

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

Well thats his opinion on one particular gym

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

Crap climber office boy writes dull article about some dull indoor climbing wall.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

He's basically moaning about climbing walls not having woodies, even though any decent wall will have them. 

Route setting is better than ever, holds get changed much more frequently and there's a much bigger spread of grades these days.

The blokes talking bolloc*s.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

I’m on the fence about the big volume thing. If the issue is whether indoor setting translates to outdoor climbing then having some holds where you actually have to think about how to use them and which bit to use seems like a good thing. Although big, blobby “comp” style problems often require a different skill set to most outdoor routes.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

'I’d like to walk onto a new gym and feel the same sense of sweaty-tipped awe I felt when I first walked into Brooklyn Boulders 11 years ago.'

Ah, nostalgia. 

It was better back when I was better. 

In reply to Maggot:

Not that crap as he has climbed 8b and bouldered 8A.

In reply to Maggot:

Hey don't blame me!

In reply to bouldery bits:

Amusingly, much of my nostalgia of this sort is more like "it was better back when I was crap". You can see past a lot of stuff when you are a newbie and it's amazing.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

If you want to serve outdoor climbers you should include spring-clipped holds that snap off at a certain load, or loaded in a certain direction.

Water outlets to create weep lines.

Muddy mats at the bottom.

Fulmar-puke jets

Wasp nests.

etc etc

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

I thought this was a good argument that made valid points. The “expensive boulders” Instagram account is well worth a look for the insanity of some modern setting. Let’s face it, whilst small volumes are cool and interesting, the massive ones add little to the climbing and do take up a lot of wall space. The only walls that have the kind of hold/problem-dense, easy to create your own problems set up are boards which are often very steep; I’d certainly like to have a similar set up on a vertical or slightly overhanging panels.

The incentives for climbing walls aren’t always to create places that are amazing for training for climbing, rather too often they end up as decent but not as good as they could be. That’s a shame.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

What a tremendously tedious article. 

In reply to Andy Long:

And... run outs?

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

It is a very boring and waffly article that struggles to articulate its own point. But, I do wonder if there's not a few points buried within there that are worth thinking about, e.g.

1. The photo in the article of the rubik's cube problem... wtf? Infantalisation or what!? Fortunately this sort of thing is mostly confined to clip & clips in the UK; Bog forgive that such nonsense makes its way into the mainstream of UK bouldering gyms.

2. Indoor holds are too big. It would be good to get some more "traditional" problems composed of small crimps, dinks for feet and/or balance style problems (e.g. aretes), rather than too many jug or volume fests. This is especially true in the lower grades (e.g. VB - V6), where lazy setting or an excess of caution means that many gyms are setting up to at least "V4" with loads of enormous jugs... which is a shame. (By the by, many of these V2 - V4s are actually VB - V2s... and the V0 and V1s are often easier than ladders to climb.) When there is good setting in low grades, it's very refreshing.

3. Appropriate hold density is an interesting thing to speculate about... Perhaps more can be made of smaller areas... On the other hand, I think the real reason for gyms needing more space is the number of people and basic comfort, safety, etc., rather than hold density, so I think the writer is just wrong on this point.

That's all.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

Indoor walls are kind of failing outdoor climbers …mainly because we’re not the core demographic. Someone said to me last week “remember when we used to be the freaks”. We’re the oddballs because we do climb outside. We’re not to be trusted with small holds and awkward moves because we’d get injured and complain. We like vanity grading because V2 isn’t a very big number, it’s only two more than zero. We still have option to make up our own problems but at the whim of setters having useful adjacent holds. I miss the splatter board at my local wall for that reason. Circuit board that replaced it, both would be better.

In reply to steveriley:

I often do the vertical "V2s" skipping all the "handholds" and using just the feet to try and get something that feels more like UK 5b/5c. It's embarassing how often this is very doable.

In reply to C Witter:

P.s. LOLing at the dislikes, which either come from the disgruntled setters whose grading system has been massively distorted by catering to novice climbers or the disgruntled punters who believe in these grades...

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

Not a great article, but it certainly points at a genuine problem with bouldering walls struggling to cater for two conflicting groups - actual climbers who want to train for actual climbing and those doing indoor bouldering with its comp-inspired blobby bollocks for its own sake.

In reply to C Witter:

I agree with the points you made, but don't agree with the above.  You've no real insight into why the "dislikes".  And whilst I've also no real insight into the genuineness of your "Lols", I get the feeling that there's a certain amount of irkness behind it.  As a frequent recipient of dislikes, I would say life's too short to give a sh*t.  I give an occasional opinion on things that feel to me in someway important.  If people don't like them, then I feel I'm probably doing something right.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

I can't be bothered to read this but get the gist of it from what followed. How is it that I can Trad lead 5c moves with ease whilst not having climbed outside much  for a few years? I think the only answer can be that bouldering indoors has prepared me very well for outdoor climbing. 

In reply to Robert Durran: but you can train very well for outdoor climbing on indoor walls... it seems to me the main complaint is a lack of 70's traversing? 

Well 1.  Get a fingerboard.  Does thd same thing more effective.

2. Build your own vertical wall.  Then you can go back to the climbing wall when you're bored in a month or so, and don't like getting weaker.

3. Get on with what seems to work for everyone else. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

Comp climbing and comp style problems are climbing 

In reply to FactorXXX:

Good factual correction!

But the bit about him writing a dull article is undisputable though

In reply to Andrew Wells:

Do you honestly believe that the "speed climbing" part of a competition is really climbing ??

In reply to fred99:

Just because it's not your definition of climbing doesn't mean it isn't climbing. I have no interest In it at all but if someone wants to climb a few plastic holds as fast as possible who are you to criticise them!

As long as you're not damaging the rock or hurting anyone climbing can be whatever you want it to be, wether that's starting a boulder problem while sitting on the floor, aid climbing with etriers, trying to dyno up Minus Ten wall without touching any of the other 120 holds on there or any of the other weird and wonderful rules, boundaries and definitions we give ourselves.

It's all just pissing about.

In reply to wbo2:

Not as well as I used to before the blobby stuff came in to vogue.

I've got two. Does specific things very effectively but not all the things good indoor bouldering does.

Why would I do that? If I had space and the inclination I'd build an overhanging one for the good honest cranking that is getting squeezed out at bouldering walls by the blobby stuff.

Well I just have to make the most of what is available which is not as good as it used to be. 

In reply to fred99:

Climbing is a verb. You can climb anything and it counts as climbing by definition. We as climbers have created some entirely contrived rules about it, and sure I play the bouldering game on rock and love it more than anything (and I have no interest in speed climbing), but the idea that comp climbing/speed climbing isn't climbing is both obviously wrong and kinda silly.

Honestly I think there's a lot of gatekeeping that goes on and always has been, and personally I've got very little time for it. UKC is largely trad-oriented and has in general rather traditional views on the tiers of what is the most valid forms of climbing; I get it and why that is, but saying "I like Real Climbing, not jumpy comp bollocks" is just nonsensical to me. There's no such thing as "real climbing" and even if there was who gives a shit what people do with their time. 

(As an aside I suspect one reason why some people don't like comp problems is cos generally they're really hard and require the kind of gymnastic capability that you can get away with not having if you just want to do hard stuff on rock, and its easier to scoff than it is to learn how to paddle dyno)

In reply to Andrew Wells:

You know perfectly well that what is meant by "real" climbing is climbing on real rock.

There is no reason to learn if you see indoor climbing as training for real climbing.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I do know what you meant, yes. I just disagree with it. Indoor climbing is real climbing. You are real, the wall is real, you are climbing, therefore it is real climbing.

As for there's no reason to learn; I don't agree with that either necessarily, if you want to do hard boulders being a good gymnastic climber is pretty useful. Everyone I see at the works smashing out hard comp problems in Unit E can piss through high grade stuff outdoors no problem.

In reply to Andrew Wells:

If someone means a particular thing by "real" climbing, then that is what they mean.

But not if you don't want to do "real" bouldering.

But that does not imply that it is necessary to be able to do indoor comp style problems in order to climb hard problems outdoors.

In reply to Robert Durran:

No but I definitely think some people say "I don't care for that" when really they just can't do it, and the people who can do it can turn the necessary strength to ourdoors very easily.

Anyway your point originally was that if you want to go out and climb on rock then indoor climbing doesn't help. I'd say that's rubbish; the first time I went indoors I could barely do the easiest circuits, 18 months later I went out for the first time and did 6B in a few goes, indoor climbing got me there. 18 months after that and now I hover around 7A+ ourdoors at my best, and I'd say 90% of my bouldering volume ever has been indoors. 

Your assessment of what "real" climbing means is pretty meaningless to me. It's all climbing, you're just one more climber who wants to gatekeep based on contrived and outdated concepts of what is more or less valid as a way to spend time, concepts which I'm glad to say are increasingly drowned out in the community. As it happens I personally value ascents of outdoor problems over other stuff but I'm not about to pretend people I know who only go indoors aren't "real climbers" (whatever that is) when by definition they are.

In reply to Andrew Wells:

No, I didn't say that at all. I just claimed that the blobby/parkour stuff doesn't really help. I boulder indoors to get strong and technically more proficient for outdoor climbing and I use the lead wall indoors to get fit for outdoors. I enjoy my indoor training immensely.

It is just a convenient way to differentiate between climbing on plastic and on rock.

No I just acknowledged there was a conflict between those wanting to do blobby stuff and those wanting to do indoor bouldering as training for outdoors; space given over to the blobby stuff means less of the valuable training stuff. OK, I did say the blobby stuff was bollocks, but that's just me!

In reply to Robert Durran:

In the sense that there is a distinction between the use of indoor bouldering as useful for training to get better at outdoor route climbing, and indoor bouldering as training for comps, I think there's some but not a lot of overlap in terms of movement skills. So yes on that I think you've got a point.

In reply to Longsufferingropeholder:

That article seems to be an extended humblebrag. There are many more punters than wads in the world, so climbing walls cater for punters. If he's sure there's a demand he should start a wads only wall, with high density / big number problem boards all round!

In reply to Robert Durran:

Blobby stuff on the comp wall might not represent the holds encountered on most Trad routes but the core strength that is gained whilst bouldering on them is invaluable when out Trad climbing. If ones outdoor route of choice is on crimps on a vertical wall then you'll need to practice on another type of route or perhaps a system board. But when has a climbing wall ever been representative of climbing outdoors? Where are the jams? 

For me the challenge has become the endurance to climb hard 45m pitches. The Crux move is now trivial. I'm not going to blame the wall for this. My lack of endurance is because I'm not focused enough on training for that. 

I'd suggest that climbing outdoors is never going to be good for training for climbing outdoors. It's just too expensive and time consuming to get out on the rock often enough. 

In reply to mutt:

Probably not if you live most places in the UK, but probably far better and cheaper if you live some places in, say, Spain.

In reply to mutt:  There are plenty of places where you can get out on the rock plenty often, and the weather in the UK is not that bad.  Whether or not it's the most efficient use of your time is another thing altogether

In reply to Andrew Wells:

Agree with all of this and let me say...
I go to the local bouldering wall once a week right now, not much I know but I enjoy it. The first wall I went to was the original Leeds wall and so I've been to the old and modern and most in between. I don't care that I often struggle on the new gen walls but I do think that they are often similar to Fontainbleau and Grit, especially the rounded horrors which to my shame were always my favourite styles of climbing. I've done lots of crimpy trad and some of the routes are ace but if I were only allowed to climb say a dozen more routes I'd choose weird rounded Grit every time. I also think that the modern walls are kinder on the joints than some of the old vertical crimp designs and while I am in mid rant let me pass on one of the best pieces of advice I ever had about bouldering, from the great Jacky Godoffe no less, which is to avoid jumping off as much as possible as repeated impact knackers the lower back; just saying.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I go through phases with the blobby stuff. There are times that I hate it because I’m not very good at it, and there are other times when I (kind of) enjoy it because I’ve given it a chance and done a bit. It seems to have settled down to the comp walls in the places I go to, although the ClimbingWorks seems to combine blobby type movement with normal type holds sometimes which is interesting.

I was at the Sheffield Depot yesterday, the comp wall was down for resetting but is the home of blobs, so I reckon the blobs are about 10% of wall area. 90% of the walls for normal cranking is ok. Is that kind of ratio not the case where you are? I think that probably the biggest threat to steep cranking on tiny holds is the proliferation of routes in the lower grades which  see the most action and pay the rent. In truth, having started using ‘walls’ over 40 years ago I think we’re really lucky, even with the blobs.

In reply to seankenny:

It's not that that's a bad argument - I'd probably agree to some extent. IMO the problem with the original article is that it's incredibly long and self-important for something that essentially boils down to "some people are running their businesses in a way that doesn't ideally suit my personal requirements".

In reply to Ramblin dave:

Most articles can be boiled down to one or two lines, that is just par for the course. I think the argument is more subtle than detractors such as yourself depict, but the widespread complaint that it is too long seems churlish. Think how much time you spend talking to eejits on here!

In reply to Ramblin dave:

I agree, the article is largely self-important rubbish