UKH

So, you have led a route you have previously either seconded or top roped cleanly in the past. Recording it in UKC logbook seems only to give the option of this being a repeat ascent rather than say a redpoint lead. Is this the consensus view, a glitch in the logbook system or am I doing something wrong in my recording?

In reply to tmawer:

record it as a lead, leave the other bit blank, and then just put the circumstances in the notes.

In reply to gravy:

This is what I do, however it doesn't seem to sit comfortably with the more OCD type elements of my personality!

In reply to tmawer:

I think you may have to accept that there isn't a distinct category for very possible circumstance around the ascent of a route.

What is it if it starts raining half way up and you traverse off part way, then lead it again on another occasion? What is it you think you might have seconded someone up a route that let you see some of the holds, but you can't remember them very well...

In reply to tmawer:

It is more like a lead with beta I'd say, that's how I record them.

In reply to Milesy:

Lead with beta is a flash. But you can't flash something if you've climbed it before, on toprope or whatever. 

It's a redpoint.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I agree it's a redpoint, but the logbook won't allow this as an option if you have climbed it cleanly in any way before.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

I think you may be missing the point, this is a very specific and common, circumstance I'm describing. Much of redpointing involves trying things on a rope, however if you finally work all the sections and piece it together on a rope before then leading it, the logbook will only allow you to record this ascent as a repeat or to delete the previous successful top rope ascent which leave is an incomplete  record of what went on.

In reply to tmawer:

I think 'it depends' and prefer to have both options. There's a push for everything to be shoehorned into strict categories but forcing everyone to log these as redpoints doesn't make sense because you'd get loads of people "redpointing" vdiffs. This completely changes what "redpoint" means in normal conversation/ real life. 

I don't really like the intrusion of hard sport climbing terminology into my bumbly climbing log because redpoint implies something very different (as used in conversation*) to anything I've ever done on routes outdoors. I do use it in my logbook when I've repeated something cleanly that I've previously failed on but I'm not going to start logging vdiffs or hard severes that I happen to have previously seconded as "redpoints". That said, if I second something that's hard for me and later lead it I probably would log it as redpoint. Or maybe just "lead" and add a "Previously seconded" note. I think its a grey area that doesn't need clearing up.

*The normal conversational meaning of redpoint being: Abseiling or thoroughly dogging something, toproping it all day, then removing your shirt and leading it over several tries while someone shouts "allez". Then sending it (somewhere??). Then pos(t)ing about your conquest on instatube.

In reply to tmawer:

Uh guess I misunderstood your point completely. Bit strange they don't let you log it as redpoint. Probably needs changing.

In reply to JHiley:

Have a like!

In reply to tmawer:

Ah, yes I am - it's about what the logbook actually allows, not what category something falls into. Sounds easy enough to change.

In reply to tmawer:

It's a glitch...

in a sense that it was possible earlier to log it as redpoint (afair).

I'm so sorry for yer OCD... which is why I'm now mostly using other logbooks (as they support better my OCD driven enginerding mind).

still, best way is to have everything in a nice proper book (ya know, paper+pen and so on).

In reply to JHiley:

Can I humbly recommend the following steps:

1) Switch off the ego

2) Update the logbook

3) Switch on the ego *

* optional

In reply to tmawer:

I would use the "lead redpoint" if it was on a climb that was at my physical or mental limit and needed further practise to do so even if i had done it before as a second or top rope.

If I just lead a climb cleanly that I had seconded or tope roped years ago but without having to practice it again. I would just put "lead repeat" as this still tells you that you had some prior knowledge etc.

In reply to tmawer:

It’s a repeat ascent so it’s a repeat. The fact it’s now on lead doesn’t really make much difference, surely. If your first ascent on second/top rope was clean/dogged/red pointed then that sets the record straight in your logbook with regards your onsight attempt after which everything is a plain old repeat. I guess the only exception would be if you DNF’d it on second/top rope in which case then redpoint might then be the right term. 

In reply to mrphilipoldham:

Does this not do away with the concept of most redpoints, as frequently a person will have climbed it clean on a rope before finally leading it?

In reply to petegunn:

I would use the "lead redpoint" if it was on a climb that was at my physical or mental limit and needed further practise to do so even if i had done it before as a second or top rope.

The log book won't allow this Pete. If you have cleanly climbed something previously on a rope it will not allow redpoint as an option. So you may have spent ages getting solid enough to lead something but it will only be recorded as a repeat....this would be the case with first ascents too, which is a bit sad!?

In reply to tmawer

Thats odd as i have a few top rope routes marked as onsight and then a lead go with lead redpoint??

Scrogbank Ravers (E6 6b)

In reply to tmawer:

I was informed on another thread recently that a lot of (most?) sport climbers will redpoint on lead as it's easier to get back on the wall than it is with a top rope due to generally steeper rock, so perhaps not. 

In reply to petegunn:

That is odd. I just tried with something I top roped at the weekend and if I ever had the balls to lead it, which I don't, it only allows repeat?

In reply to mrphilipoldham:

Possibly true but doesn't address the point really.

In reply to tmawer:

Your points don't really address the basic English. If you've completed the route already as a second or on top rope, then anything else is a repeat. Yes, you could tick it as beta, as you have knowledge of it and yes, you could tick it as redpoint as you've previously tried the moves. But both of those ignore and hide the fact that you've climbed it before. Repeat shows that you have knowledge of it and have climbed it before. It's the most 'honest' style.

In reply to mrphilipoldham:

Fair enough.....the end of "much" redpointing on a linguistic nicety

In reply to tmawer:

Well not really, as I pointed out, (apparently) "much" red pointing is done on lead.

In reply to mrphilipoldham:

If you log a redpoint it means you haven't led it clean before. Hide? Who cares it got it clean on TR before you led it? Repeat would mean you've led it clean previously. Already been ticked.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Repeat does not mean you've lead it clean previously. It means you've climbed the line before. If I were to second a route as my 'onsight' attempt, then return and do it again as a second, that's a repeat.. how could it be anything else? Yet a "repeat would mean you've led it clean previously"...?

Personally I'd care that I'd onsighted whatever on top rope before returning to lead it. It's a log of my history and a good marker of where you were at, at that point in time. The fact you onsighted moves of grade x become lost to history otherwise. That's the beauty of it all though - it only really matters to you.

In reply to mrphilipoldham:

Of course it does if we're talking about leads, which is what the OP is talking about. The first clean lead is important. It's important to give this distinct 'style'. Did you have any beta, had you climbed or practiced it before?

If you log a TR repeat then it means you've done it clean before.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

But as I pointed out, repeat quite clearly notes that you had beta and had practised it before and most importantly signifies that you'd completed the route in it's entirety before. Beta and redpoint do not show the full picture as they do not signify that you'd completed the line before, only that either you had knowledge of or had practised the moves which can be done as a second, on top rope or indeed on lead without ever having touched the final holds.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I don't read that much into it.

When I log something I keep it simple, it is for my own benefit any that's it.

Lead onsight

Lead repeat

Lead beta

It only needs to make sense to me.

In reply to mrphilipoldham:

Except that's very unimportant. Anyway, we disagree and use the logbook differently.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Good advice in general but I don't think "ego" has much to do with how I log a vdiff I've seconded before. The reason I won't call it a redpoint is it completely changes what "redpoint" actually means.

In reply to JHiley:

Wasn't totally serious. But redpointing isn't linked to grades or how hard you try. Out of interest what do you think it means?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

That's unimportant to you. Come on, I've laid out that it's all my preference  

Are you honestly saying that if I seconded a VDiff then went back and led it, the correct way to log it is as a red point? What did people log it as before red point came about as a term? 

In reply to mrphilipoldham:

Given I'm a serial redpointer and spend most of my time with serial redpointers, none of us care.

I would do that now. The grade doesn't matter. Replace with top-roped an E11.

Doesn't the term redpoint predate the UKC logbook? Maybe pre-UKC they would say 'led after practice', or maybe they just climbed and didn't care? I don't know really, it doesn't matter other than in a historical sense.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Well, quite. Still, an interesting discussion all the same. 

Edit - Yes redpoint pre-dates the UKC log book, but climbing began before UKC came along and folk used to scribble notes in diaries and the like. I'd like to think that they just used 'repeat' or words to that effect  

In reply to tmawer:

I think that filtering rule only applies when you first enter it. I think you can then subsequently edit it. 

I had a similar issue with DWS in that I think it restricts you from using g/u if you've previously logged a dnf, but yet "soup up" is the correct description for a multi-session dws ascent.

In reply to AJM:

You are correct.... All is now well with my world... Thanks! 

In reply to tmawer:

Glad to be of service!

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I think it means working a route then leading it. So if I fall off a route then do it next go, that's not a redpoint, that's doing it second go.

Lucky I don't keep a log book, I'd be demanding more options still! 

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Ground up if you lower and pull the ropes. Yo-yo if you leave the ropes in. Assuming in both cases you just lower off and try again. Otherwise it's a redpoint. Like it or not. No need to take your shirt off or do any screaming.  

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Is there an option for yoyo? 

In reply to JHiley:

What is the current efinition of Redpoint (or headpoint for trad, albeit most people use redpoint for that as well.)

Is it not first successful lead ascent of said route with actual experience on it. Just like an Onsight is defined successful lead of the route without no prior knowledge of it (other than what a guidebook describes).

So if you have climbed something as a second (or toproped) said route, when you lead it, the ascent simply happens to be a redpoint. Sure, it didn't require much effort (vs full on siege on a multi year project), but still by definition it is the first successful lead ascent by you, ergo redpoint.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Sadly not I don't think. Must be easy to add it. Don't know why it'd be missing. I've never, but somebody might like to climb in that style. Actually I did a Yo-yo on a multipitch once, or a pitch on one. Got scared, lowered, left the ropes clipped, did it next go.

In reply to HeMa:

Pretty much. I think people have seen too many videos of Ondra and the like. And obviously don't want to be guilty by association. 

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

&  also HeMa

I think the relative difficulty for a climber (not so much the grade) does affect whether a climb can be "redpointed". Redpointing means sending something after working it. If a normal HS to E1 leader solos or leads a vdiff they've previously seconded they aren't working it because they can most likely do it routinely and without much challenge.

Redpoint originally means eliminating aid points doesn't it? But in conversation it's come to mean working routes that are harder than you routinely flash/OS. Applying it to the (probably much more common) situation of bumbling up some severe you seconded a couple of years before is a complete distortion of what it normally means in conversation. The word just isn't needed or wanted in that situation.

The whole point is sort of irrelevant to the OP anyway. I misinterpreted him as meaning he wanted to remove the "repeat" option when actually he just wanted to reinstate the "redpoint" option which had apparently vanished. I'd probably just log em as "lead" and comment "previously seconded" but I think "repeat" is fine and probably makes more sense than "redpoint" a lot of the time.

In reply to JHiley:

It did (Kurt Albert & Frankenjura Rotpunkt). But as said, now the generally understood definition is to cleanly lead a route, but having prior experience of it (instead of having "beta" of it -> flash, or no "beta" -> Onsight). Often it is used in the context of sport climbing, but redpoint doesn't actually care if you are clippin' bolts, placing cams or soloing something (albeit the latter is up for discussio... but how would you describe the succesful pre-practiced solo ascent other than redpoint solo).

https://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/features/a_glossary_of_climbing_terms_f... this article clearly onyl talks about sport climbing...

https://eveningsends.com/climbingclimbing-definitions this one is more generic (closer to the universal meaning) and this one is also on the same line https://www.thecrag.com/en/article/ticktypes

So again, you're thinking about the use of said term in a specific case (sport climbing), where it is indeed used a lot. But it is also used in other cases (albeit you brits & alike still tend to use headpoint for practised trad ascents, where as a lot of other climbers around the globe will simple settle for redpoint).

In reply to JHiley:

I think the giveaway is 'wanted'.