UKH

Following on from the +/- poll, one of the possible solutions is to use Adjectival and French grades on harder trad routes (*), but keep UK tech grades with Adjectival grades on easier trad routes. But does this mixed grading systems approach actually work?

We already have an example of this, the Peak Bouldering Rockfax uses V and UK tech grades on the easier problems, V and Font grades on the harder problems, very similar to the trad route grading possibility.

So lets have people's opinions on whether it's worked - please only vote if you've actually used the guide - but replies with your opinion are still welcome from all.

[The poll won't let me create 6 options - which is what it would obviously need so I've had to combine the "upper" and "lower" answers to bring it down to 4 options]

(*) - I know this is in use in various places and informally, but this may become the de-facto solution.

Thanks for asking this question.

FYI we have completely dropped the dual system in the forthcoming Peak Bouldering guide (as we had already done in Dorset Bouldering, Southern Sandstone and bouldering coverage in other guides). We now exclusively use the font system. 

Alan

I don't see it as a mixed grade system in anything like the way UK adjectival grades work. Back when the BMC made the difficult choice to go with V grades and UK tech, bouldering in the Peak was probably expanding more at lower grades (in participant numbers) than anywhere and using the same technical grades as on routes for lower grade problems made sense, as a well understood benchmark. V grades on their own didn't (as they started at V0~ 5b) and it was impossible to understand the allocated Font grades in Font in the sub f6A range as they were 99% wrong, and randomly so (as the 'guardians' are too stubborn to upgrade problems that get harder due to polish etc). As lower grade champions, we thought the YMC system we worked on, after the end of the BMC gritstone series, arguably works better: with a rough equivalence table of YMC style 'no nonsense' Font grades to  UK tech grades (for a standard problem: eg f3+ was a typical UK4b problem, but not a sustained one at 4b). Potterers, punters and wads get to use a consistent system that works. Combining Font grades with UK tech will always be confusing.

I suspect comments are probably more useful than poll responses on this one. Even if 100% of respondents hated the mixed system, that wouldn't matter for the addition of French grades at the top end of Trad if the reason people hated the mixed boulder grades was specific to that grading system or to the way Rockfax implemented it. For example, if a load of people just hate the UK tech grade for bouldering or felt that the transition between the two systems should have happened at a different grade.

Give up.

Good result, now all we need is for indoor bouldering walls to follow suit. Or to put a disclaimer against V grades. 'These grades are designed to flatter and give a nice progression. Outdoor holds may slope, be uncomfortably sharp and dirty. The ground hurts and there's no espresso machine in the corner. You're likely not actually a V6 climber yet'.*

Looking forward to the new Peak guide, the old one is held together by tape. But I'm also not looking forward to the Peak new guide, the old one is like an old friend. It's not quite the same copying your ticks across. Unless there's plenty of upgrades of course.

*I do actually like indoor climbing

Give up what, climbing? - nope

Much as I like the UK adjectival+technical grade system, I'm not trying to keep it going no matter what. It still works for me, but that's because of my climbing background, and what & where I climb.

This poll and my earlier one are merely attempts to get a slightly more quantitative feel to some of the ideas/issues than the many threads of comments/opinions - not sure it's worked but I thought it was worth trying anyway.

Ultimately, what matters for all grading systems is their utility; i.e. how well they convey the necessary information (whatever that might be). A lot of what all these trad grading discussions are about basically come down to two things:

1. The existing system is broken, do we try and fix it, or do we make significant changes/replacements
2. How do we retain the good bits of existing systems, but still get rid of the poor bits

Personally, I think trad technical grades are living on borrowed time. They could be fixed (and maybe if there'd been enough impetus 20 years ago they might have been and we'd be having a different discussion), but the changing demographic of climbers (i.e. more wall >> sport >> trad) is swinging (or has already swung) the balance away from that to replacing tech grades with French or Bouldering grades (as appropriate to each climb).

The soulless advertising manager in me thinks we’ve missed an opportunity by now having some sort of Conservative styled ‘cash for honours’ list, whereby you can pay us vast swathes of money to have your hardest routes and boulder problems upgraded.

Maybe one for the next edition 😅

Grading schemes you never hear anyone moaning about:

• Font
• French sport
• UK trad below E4

Grading schemes people never stop moaning about:

• V
• UK trad 6b and up

V0, and UK 6b&6c are just entirely meaningless. But that's the only problem here. And the fix is pretty obvious. There's no need for some kind of revolution.

Except for actually at Font in the "lower" grades

What's wrong with them? 

There's plenty of stuff your average Brit would argue is in the wrong grade, but there's the right number of grades.

The most egregious and random overgrading I've ever seen anywhere is on the easier Font adult circuits. Most Brits quite rightly just ignore the individual grades given to such problems. I really fail to see the point of having 15 grade steps  from f1A to f5C that you may as well shake a dice and add the notches the dice says to anything like a fair grade.