Tony
Carpal tunnel level member
- Location
- Lancaster, PA
Riggs,
I think you are seeing the climber's best climb, that day. It may not be what he or she does day to day, but a good climber at that level is a good climber. Sure you can luck into a Master's challenge. I certainly have done it! However, the event will sort itself. Good judges will be able to tell climbers with "all hat and no cattle" in a heart beat.
Could it be done differently with different tools? Yes, but I say paint your Picasso on the job, where it matters. Relax and enjoy the comp for what it is, as it is. Revel in the hidden benefits, drink warm beers and laugh!
Reg,
No patience required here! I am enjoying the exchange. You hit the nail on the head, weird! (I wish I had wrote that. Take that as one of the highest compliments I give
)
Why the delay? Why the rush? Both valid questions, both from a different perspective. I do not wish to go into the technical aspects. Those are beaten to death and smell of dead horse! Just a moment though consider the physical logistics involved and how they accumulate. Often over 60 climbers, two days of events, a protocol in place for two decades. Change will take longer than in the past. Think about the work climb alone, so many climbers only so many hours. It hardly gets done they way it is now!
In short, other changes need to occur first, the event needs to be longer, it needs a site conducive to the advanced techniques we wish to see advocated. The site many times has been lacking. Often just getting 15 meters for the foot lock poses an extreme challenge. 2013's work climb, while passable and the best a devoted group of skilled volunteers could muster, remains "ho-hum" in my mind. Put a climber as skilled as Scott Forest in it and . . . well just look at his winning time. Again not to delve into the technical, but consider the physical aspects.
Let us not forget to consider the change that has already happened, look to the results of the NATCC. Is it enough? Is it "fast" enough? I have given you all my perspective.
To answer directly why the delay, as stated, other things, larger issues, need addressed. I cannot speak for the committees and individuals holding positions, they can speak for themselves, but from my perspective there are larger internal battles to be fought and won, before more obvious change, from a competitor's perspective, can be noticed.
I think, Reg, you and I see SRT, in all it's itinerant forms, the same way. A tool to be used. If climber's see the slowness of the more modern forms of SRT slow to be accepted at the ITCC as a slight against them personally, if they feel disenfranchised, by it, well then my advice is to hike up the big kid climbing pants, put a smile on your face, go to the comp, compete, or help out and have fun. That is the way I have seen effective change comes about at the ITCC. The change treehumper refers to. They type of change that needs to happen or else, as we all realize, the end will hasten. I believe it can. I believe it is. That is why I continue to be involved.
Are there personality differences involved? Are there curmudgeons, such as myself, holding on to things too long? Can we please all the people all the time?
Yes,yes and no respectively. I am sorry to hear that in some areas climber participation has fallen. For me this is where the sad comes in. I think the splinter groups and comps are a natural thing and would have happened anyway, regardless. Seems to be the logical consequence of a whole bunch of independent, hard working people aiming to a simmilar goal. Each from his or her own perspective. I never could get enough opportunities to compete when I was going at it, and I had way more opportunity than most.
Speaking to all readers. Take all that we have talked about for what it is worth, make your decisions and move forward.
Tony
I think you are seeing the climber's best climb, that day. It may not be what he or she does day to day, but a good climber at that level is a good climber. Sure you can luck into a Master's challenge. I certainly have done it! However, the event will sort itself. Good judges will be able to tell climbers with "all hat and no cattle" in a heart beat.
Could it be done differently with different tools? Yes, but I say paint your Picasso on the job, where it matters. Relax and enjoy the comp for what it is, as it is. Revel in the hidden benefits, drink warm beers and laugh!
Reg,
No patience required here! I am enjoying the exchange. You hit the nail on the head, weird! (I wish I had wrote that. Take that as one of the highest compliments I give
)Why the delay? Why the rush? Both valid questions, both from a different perspective. I do not wish to go into the technical aspects. Those are beaten to death and smell of dead horse! Just a moment though consider the physical logistics involved and how they accumulate. Often over 60 climbers, two days of events, a protocol in place for two decades. Change will take longer than in the past. Think about the work climb alone, so many climbers only so many hours. It hardly gets done they way it is now!
In short, other changes need to occur first, the event needs to be longer, it needs a site conducive to the advanced techniques we wish to see advocated. The site many times has been lacking. Often just getting 15 meters for the foot lock poses an extreme challenge. 2013's work climb, while passable and the best a devoted group of skilled volunteers could muster, remains "ho-hum" in my mind. Put a climber as skilled as Scott Forest in it and . . . well just look at his winning time. Again not to delve into the technical, but consider the physical aspects.
Let us not forget to consider the change that has already happened, look to the results of the NATCC. Is it enough? Is it "fast" enough? I have given you all my perspective.
To answer directly why the delay, as stated, other things, larger issues, need addressed. I cannot speak for the committees and individuals holding positions, they can speak for themselves, but from my perspective there are larger internal battles to be fought and won, before more obvious change, from a competitor's perspective, can be noticed.
I think, Reg, you and I see SRT, in all it's itinerant forms, the same way. A tool to be used. If climber's see the slowness of the more modern forms of SRT slow to be accepted at the ITCC as a slight against them personally, if they feel disenfranchised, by it, well then my advice is to hike up the big kid climbing pants, put a smile on your face, go to the comp, compete, or help out and have fun. That is the way I have seen effective change comes about at the ITCC. The change treehumper refers to. They type of change that needs to happen or else, as we all realize, the end will hasten. I believe it can. I believe it is. That is why I continue to be involved.
Are there personality differences involved? Are there curmudgeons, such as myself, holding on to things too long? Can we please all the people all the time?
Yes,yes and no respectively. I am sorry to hear that in some areas climber participation has fallen. For me this is where the sad comes in. I think the splinter groups and comps are a natural thing and would have happened anyway, regardless. Seems to be the logical consequence of a whole bunch of independent, hard working people aiming to a simmilar goal. Each from his or her own perspective. I never could get enough opportunities to compete when I was going at it, and I had way more opportunity than most.
Speaking to all readers. Take all that we have talked about for what it is worth, make your decisions and move forward.
Tony
Last edited:
