 | |  | |  | |  |
So what's up? V14 for years and years and then all of a sudden four V15's? Doubtful, ehh?!
I thinks there is an interesting lesson tucked away somewhere in this conundrum. It took
some serious confidence for Fred to come out and say "look, this new thing I did, was harder
than anything else, and the world is ready for a new level, let's up the ante." Despite the fact
that Dreamtime has been repeated by several strong climbers, the grade holds... Not to
knock Fred, I do think he has the biggest forearms around and seems like a really nice dude,
but many of his problems in the past have been downrated by up to two grades (eg. V12 to
V10 (I've been on such problems in Cresciano and here in the Buttermilks (know which
ones?)). So why are people so accepting of this new extreme?
Because it's subjective, that's why. Who could say "No Fred, sorry buddy, that things V14."
Well, I guess Dave Graham or Bernd Zangrel (who did initially cast a shadow of doubt,) but
why would they? Hell, the sponsors must love it, and climbers everywhere who know how
hard V6 is are going: "SSIIICCCKKKK!!!" When it's out of reach for the masses, people won't
stick their necks out and say something they nothing about (like me and V15.) My bet is that
someday these climbs are downrated by sick mutant kids who will warm up on them. Plus, I
think there are probably 100 boulderers who could send Dreamtime right now. Not that it
matters much, but here's what I think.
I think climbing difficulty is an asymptotic curve: one that never "reaches" the limit yet
approaches it. (check back in Nov. for a picture) Basically, the gaps in difficulty between
easier problems seems to be a lot bigger than the gaps between harder problems. What I'm
getting at is this: There is a certain "hardest move" that each of us can do. Generally hard
boulder problems are either more of these moves stuck together (like the unsent V16 (17?
18?) HMC link-up in Austrailia) or moves that are ever so slightly beyond our limit, and ever
so slightly within someone else's. this .00001% difference translates to possible or
impossible. Black or white. Or grey if you think it's possible when it's not and train yourself
over the edge. And that's the lesson, maybe. Anything someone does is possible. Good,
that's obvious, thanks a lot! But consider it: thought is the bridge! If you know something is
possible, than it generally is. In bouldering we deal with a lot of truth. Either we can do
something or we cannot. The allure of bouldering for many of us is the unknow truths of 'is it
possible for me?'
I don't know what the hell is the difference between V14 and V15, or between V3 and V4 for
that matter... If someone has the strength to lay it on the line and suggest a new grade, I say
good for them, although the grade itself doesn't mean much to me. It's their decision that is
so spectacular and from which we can learn.
Try it out. The next time you go to an area you haven't been to with a friend, ask them to take
you to a project or to a hard climb and not reveal the "grade." Try it, and do it or not, practise
grading it. High confidence graders usually grade high, low confidence graders tend to grade
low. I think it'd be optimal balance to be right in the middle, grade it "right." Keep in mind that
different areas were graded by different people with different confidence levels. Like
everything in life, balance is harmony. It's important to understand where one's confidence
is. Hubris is just as bad as under-valuing self. Where do you stand? Climbing is best when
enjoyed, and climbing can best be enjoyed if one is happy with one's self. As to those ends,
understanding your climbing is understanding yourself, and climbing can be seen as a
vehicle of self-improvement. We are our own best projects and hardest climbs. Our lives are
continuous boulder problems. It is about how well you climb, day in, day out. Not what your
hardest send was. Do you flow? Are you in the Zone?
But then again, "Nothing's for certian, that's for sure..."
 | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  | |  |
 | |  | |  |