UKH

I've been lucky matching up with partners on the climbing dating site that is UKC- climbing partners just to be clear.

However, from personal experience and conversations with MRT, it's clear there are dangers from this in terms of honesty about climbing ability/experience.

I would say, be open and honest about experience as you hook up this winter. Definitely makes for a more pleasant experience.

In reply to gavmac:

Indeed. I can think of at least one acquiantance that I have seen oversell their ability on here to potential partners. Risky in summer, even more so in winter. Begs the question - why do people do it?

In reply to ianstevens:


Dunning–Kruger effect?

In reply to Mark Bull:


Had no idea this was a thing. Interesting stuff!

In reply to ianstevens:

I can kind of understand the reasons. Human pride is one! No excuse on that, leave your ego. But, more often that not, I think people want to push their grade with someone more experienced. Someone experienced tends to spot this and reassess their objective for the day.

The more dangerous situation, I think, is 2 people who have both over-egged there ability. This is where the highest risk of accidents lie.

In reply to gavmac:

Indeed, be open... unfortunately generally speakin' the "sport" to-be partner does the most kind of changes on how they tell about their experience.

E.g. sport climbers and boulderers are most likely to state their hardest sends and redpoint grades, when asked on how hard they climb. Trad climbers are more likely to tell their best on sight grades and in same cases their normal on sight grade.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule, but this has been my personal experience.

So, when hookin' up with strangers for a climb, do have a thorough chat with 'em to see if the objectives are aligned and the real-world skills set to boost.

In reply to gavmac:
I've seen a serious (but luckily non fatal / no serious long term complications) accident resulting from this where someone was looking for partners to lead climb remote V 6 despite falling off every V 5 they had seconded previously (their best lead was IV 4). This lead to them falling off a V 4 pitch with notoriously bad belays. To boot their protection was atrocious even in summer. I actually tried to help them avoid inevitable accident but they took my help (and from others around them) as a slur on the character rather than taking heed.

I went through the dilemma of should I intervene or not when I saw them looking for partners on here, luckily they didn't find one for the remote route. It wasn't long after the accident occurred and their climbing partner previously didn't know them.

There is another climber in the south that had a bad rep for this in summer, and other similar unsavoury things. Then again what should you do? I guess at least even on the more dangerous sea cliffs the scope for something serious going wrong is far lower.

In reply to gavmac:

Hi,

I think that's an important sentiment - as an inexperienced winter climber with only one season under my belt, I'm always careful to make it clear my level of experience to potential winter climbing partners this season. Overestimating or straight up lying about your ability is dangerous and doesn't create a fun atmosphere for anyone when your partner figures out you don't know what the f*ck you're doing in the middle of a route!

Ross

In reply to gavmac:

Always been much happier climbing with people who have a public ukc logbook. Hidden logbooks make me more weary because of the lack of transparency.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Can we assume that the winter climber in question has now sorted out these issues?

In reply to Mr. Lee:

That makes sense. I don't think my logbook is public on here but if I was looking for partners on UKC I would probably make it public for the very reasons you say. Tend to have a bigger network of partners now so less of an issue, and rely on recommendations from friends. But I suppose when less experienced you tend to have a smaller network of potential partners, hence coming on here.

In reply to Mr. Lee:


Yeah, they could just be making stuff up though. I mean, look at this guy. E11! At least be realistic...

http://www.ukhillwalking.com/forums/profile.php?id=22726

In reply to planetmarshall:

And he's only 28 years old!

In reply to gavmac:

One advantage of winter climbing hook-ups is the ample time afforded for conversation prior to the climb: at least an hour or two on the walk in and possibly far more if you're sharing a car on the way up. Bullshit will out

In reply to Mark Bull:
Soon to be renamed the trump-brexit effect .

In reply to gavmac:

In my experience ego is quite often inversely proportional to competence.

I definitely agree about being honest about grades, not just avoiding complete BS but admitting that that one E1 onsight was a bit of a fluke and actually you're more comfortable at VS or whatever.

I've never used UKC for belay dating but if I did I'd definitely want to do some easy stuff with them before pushing it any.

In reply to gavmac:

I've climbed with a couple of people found on here - they have been salutary experiences of wildly inflated grades based upon dogged ascents and a marked lack of competence to support operating anywhere near the grades claimed. One was apologetic and we settled for a pleasant evening of pottering and the other was a liability who legged it as soon as possible after we'd finished the route. He left in such a hurry that he left his belay plate and krab in the grass.

Cautious now, I am . Very

In reply to nniff:

Well at least you gained some gear out of it!

In reply to gavmac:
Some people want to come across as more experienced than they actually are, others don't realise that they're overestimating themselves (they've done a V or an E1 and think they are solid at the grade and up for leading a VI or an E2). Not sure which is worse.

It's annoying if people aren't being honest/realistic but if you're looking to climb with someone new, it remains your own responsibility to find out that person's level of experience, particularly for more serious climbing. UKC logbook, Facebook or blog posts, five minute chat on the phone - it should be easy enough to weed out the bullshitters. An up to date UKC profile and logbook is by far the easiest way to quickly assess people but of course not everyone has one - fair enough but I would then expect them to tell me by phone/email what they've done (and I'd be happy to tell them what I've done but it's all logged anyway).

In reply to nniff:

Just for balance, almost all of my climbing partners have been off here, and I have had nothing but great experiences. Plenty of weirdos mind, but as I'm one of them I can't really pass judgement.

In reply to Mr. Lee:


I couldn't care less if someone's UKC Logbook is public, private or non-existent... I'll assess a potential partner by talking to them. I don't have a UKC Logbook at all because it's not the way I choose to record my climbs just as Strava, Garmin Connect etc. aren't the way I choose to record my runs. But ask me and I'll tell you sure my profile says *best* onsights E1 and V but I don't regard myself as solid at either grade... I'm a VS leader who sometimes leads harder and a IV leader (with less experience of mixed) who's led a couple of Vs on ice. So I expect (and have so far always got) similar honesty from potential partners and am happy that's how it should be.

In reply to humptydumpty:


He must have had a hell of a paper round, I thought he was in his forties.

In reply to CurlyStevo:

Way too specific, Stevo! You've as good as named the person concerned in a very critical post, and could have made your point without either doing this or taking such a judgmental stance when 1. things can change with time (e.g. since then) and 2. your account may involve opinion as well as fact.

In reply to petestack:
Not sure that he posts anymore on here. In any case its a warning to others about what can happen.

Some of what I said is just factual (regarding his performance on grade V seconding and looking for partners for him to climb grade V,6 with the implication he would lead some of the money pitches). The assessment of his summer protection is an opinion but the same was said about him by his existing partners when I first climbed with him and its not like he was new to trad.

I hope he has either given up lead climbing or sorted things out.

In reply to Greasy Prusiks:

If I gain nothing else from this thread "belay dating" was sufficient!
Great term.

In reply to gavmac:

I've had a couple of partners overestimating their grades for summer but only for single pitch stuff so no great problems. I've never done any real winter climbing with people I don't know but I'd be a lot more cautious doing so.

I'm not sure why people do it, maybe they think that climbing hard will get them more partners, but this is dubious logic because as many people will be put off by this as will be impressed IMO.

In reply to gavmac:

Odd you should say this. I've met a couple of guys on here for winter shenanigans and we'd agreed on some grade III / IV welsh ice and at some point on the walk-in they've suggested an easier route.
Either I come across in conversation as incompetent or they were over egging their experience. I was surprised on the ramp (II/III) when I led the grade III pitch that my partner said "rather you than me"

In reply to angry pirate:

Which bit is odd? Just so I respond to the correct point.

In reply to lordyosch:

Thanks I was quite pleased with that one!

In reply to gavmac:

Sorry, odd as in I was recently pondering the same thing. I would have said "funny, I was just thinking" but I'm not sure that it is.

In reply to gavmac:
I think there's a huge thing of social acceptance in all this. Look at the news articles on this site: 'X onsights 8a+', 'New E11 for Y', 'First XIV for Z' etc etc. It's human nature; we like hard stuff, and seeing others pushing limits. The problem is that most of us are far from that level.

Now, the balanced (and dare I say it experienced) realise this and are happy with where they sit. The inexperienced / those seeking social acceptance don't. We've probably all been there - looking back at me as an 18 year old climber playing with people who were leading E8 I know it all too well. Times change and people grow (but thankfully I never oversold myself despite being of the mindset that I 'should' be pushing myself).

If the macro view returns to just having fun at a level the individual is comfortable with and not glorifying the very top end this would go away. Of course, this won't happen as we all love to see the aspirational hard stuff!

In reply to angry pirate:

Got you. That makes more sense, I read it wrong the first time!

In reply to gavmac:

Yeah, it was poor communication on my part
I'm as guilty as anyone: my profile shows great things on trade and ice as best onsight but with the onset of arthritis my grade is low punter at best.
I try to be as honest as possible with prospective partners to prevent embarrassment/danger and death later.

In reply to angry pirate:

Surely competence and safety are far more important than absolute grade?

Struggling with the grade is a minor issue as long as your partner is safe.

In reply to gavmac:

I've only had one experience where a friend's new boyfriend said they were a confident HVS leader and that a climbing day out would be fun. I saw it as a pleasant way of getting to know a new member of the social circle.

It didn't quite work out that way, shall we say, and was quite scary in some parts. At least they only nearly killed themselves, not me.

I think part of the problem is the way we register grades on UKC. It's always "best onsight", and we judge people on that basis - the highest grade they have ever achieved.

It's why - despite a pile of E grades on my profile, I clearly state: "Ignore the grades to the right, I am merely a reasonably solid VS leader who very, very occasionally has a good day".

In reply to timjones:

Absolutely! But struggling at a grade and consequently pushing your grade is something best done with a partner you trust and who knows your limit in advance. I have total trust in the guys I regularly climb with and they me.
When you are meeting up with a random stranger from the forums you only have their log book and their word as to their experience. Winter climbing is probably not the best place to be struggling with someone you barely know.
That said, my experiences of climbing with folk on the forums has always been very positive.

In reply to timjones:

But if someone who overestimated their climbing ability, that would ring alarm bells about their technical competence to me. I would imagine their is a degree of correlation between competence and willingness to overstate ability.

In reply to galpinos:

Already referenced higher up the thread...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

In reply to John_Hat:





I take a more fundamental approach I don't complete the best grades sections on my own profile and ignore it on everyone else's profiles.

I peaked about 25 years ago

In reply to galpinos:


I'd say that you should assess technical competence and grade as 2 separate things. I've encountered climbers that climb high grades but are most definitely not trustworthy when it comes to the basic technical skills.

I'd sooner place my life in the hands of someone who is ambitious but safe rather than strong but lethally incompetent.

In reply to ianstevens:


No better place to study it than UKC!

In reply to timjones:


I'd love to know how you make that assessment before you start climbing.

In reply to The New NickB:

Give them the first lead, preferably somewhere with a bolted belay

In reply to timjones:

I obviously failed to make my point clear. It is not the absolute grade that would trigger suspicion but the overestimate in climbing ability would make me question their technical competence. There are plenty of (most, I'd guess) lower grade climbers who are safe as houses

In reply to The New NickB:


Sadly I can't claim to have a reliable way of assessing it other than starting out on easier routes where the risks are lower.

In reply to gavmac:

To act as devils advocate (and before i start, i've not partnered with anyone off UKC before), could some of these not simply be because their best grades have been simple for the climb?

For example...I've started knocking out some HS's this year and I've got a VS under my belt. But i've experienced some truly tough routes at HS grade (cracks) and some others which were low in the grade. I'd describe myself solid at S and progressing.

That said, I'd rather people grade themselves under where they think they are at least a poss of being on target

In reply to gavmac:
I guess some of it isn't necessarily under/over grading themselves, just different statements and different takes on the same statement.

'I've climbed E2' - this is actually the least ambiguous statement. It carries the least information though - an easy E2, a hard E2, one E2 or a hundred?

'I climb E2' - much more ambiguous.
Reasonable interpretations:
Climbs a fair fraction (maybe 20%) of E2 climbs onsight or after practice.
Climbs about half of E2s onsight or after practice.
Reliably climbs E2 and climbs 80%+ onsight or after practice.
Total solid at E2 and climbs 99%+ onsight or after practice.

'E2 leader' - I would argue the last three of the above could reasonably be applied to that.

All of the above can then be interpreted in terms of local climbing - is that 'climb E2 on the grit/limestone/etc' or 'climb E2 anywhere'?

My personal statement is that I am a VS leader (possibly an HVS leader if I tried) because I get up, onsight, pretty much every VS I try - although some are damn hard! But I don't think it would be wrong for me to say I was an HVS leader because I would probably get up most HVSs, although E1 would probably be a push as while I have never failed to onsight an E1 that is mostly through careful selection rather than skill :P

Checking a UKC logbook will usually be more informative than just the ambiguous statement 'VS leader'...

In reply to andrewmcleod:













Good post.

My rule of thumb in judging the credentials of a climbing partners ability is somewhat simpler.

The true grade that they climbs at, is the grade they onsight on a regular basis, on a wide variety of routes, across a wide variety of regions, on a wide variety of rock.

Anything outside of this criteria usually represents exceptions or anomalies.

In reply to nniff:



Was one of them me

In reply to deacondeacon:


No! - you were a paragon of technical excellence in comparison! Not even close!

In reply to nniff:
Wow. They must have been bad!!

Hope you're well