Talk:Lead climbing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Okay this page needs some cleaning upJason McConnell-Leech 04:08, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of lead climbing

Anyone willing to write up a brief history of lead climbing? I'm finding it hard to find sources...

Jason McConnell-Leech 07:29, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jason, and thanks for your enthusiasm. I think this is well-covered in the more primary articles on climbing, "Rock climbing", "Trad climbing" and Sport climbing. This article on lead climbing is more of an expanded definition, as it should be, but does not really need to be expanded past where it is now. Ratagonia 15:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

In that case I suggest removal of stub. Anyone for? Against? Jason McConnell-Leech 12:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I concur, Jason. The main rock climbing article pretty much covers this material. Silentrunner 21:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Beginner vs. Intermediate?

this: "Lead climbing is generally seen as a more advanced technique and is not normally used by novice climbers. Most commonly, a climber will not start to lead climb until they have had at least 6-12 months top rope climbing experience prior."

It might be true, but as with many generalizations, it might be your local culture, or just the viewpoint of people you hang with. If you can find a source that says the same thing, that can be included. Also, these weasly super-over-qualified generalizations are not appropriate to wikipedia. Ratagonia 18:48, 18 June 2007 (UTC) (edited) Ratagonia 18:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll try and find a reliable source to cite those statements. Also, I am not quite familiar with what you mean by "these weasly super-over-qualified generalizations", could you please expand on this? Jason McConnell-Leech 13:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I think what he is trying to say is that it is unnecessary to be so specific. I started lead climbing less than a month after I started climbing. In other words - it's good enough to say that usually novice climbers don't lead, without being to specific about when one is not a novice climber anymore. He could have stated it in a more courteous manner though :) Wynand.singels 13:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

See WP:AWW and WP:APT. Sorry if taken harshly. I was trying to demonstrate on the talk page the kind of weasly super-over-qualified language that is not appropriate to the 'plain talk' of the encyclopedia (but is appropriate, at times, on the talk page. Unfortunately, my humor often misses the mark. Ratagonia 16:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

But to the point, there is a wide variation in climbing culture. In some places, yes, six-twelve months of top-roping is de rigeur before participating in lead climbing. In others? Also, is following a pitch part of lead climbing? Depends how it is stated. My own career, I started with one or two days of top-roping, then followed a couple of four-pitch climbs on my third day out. I have done the same with others that showed talent. Actually being on the sharp end and leading? Some people do this their first day in the gym. Others take forever. When I lived in Salt Lake, I met kids who were leading 5.11 sport in their third month. Ratagonia 16:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

You will perhaps find a source that says people should not lead climb until they have had 3 years experience following. You could also find a source that says all rock climbers are crazy, no one should do that, no one should be ALLOWED to do that. Please refrain from using a non-mainline source to support your opinion. Mainline sources would be Climbing Magazine, Rock and Ice Magazine, Alpinist Magazine and a few others. Places like Outside Magazine, Natl Geographic Adventure etc. are non-expert in the field of climbing and should be viewed with skepticism (IMNTHO). Ratagonia 16:19, 29 October 2007 (UTC)