Is there a list of the hardest sport onsights in the UK or does anyone know them?
Steve Mcclure on Indian Summer (8b+) at Kilnsey way back in 2002 got lots of press at the time, but not sure if it was the first at the grade.
IIRC the first 8c was Ondra on Bat Route (8c) at Malham in 2011.
I run https://climbing-history.org/ so had a search of the database.
Mark is right, Steve Mac's onsight of Indian Summer is the hardest onsight in the UK by a brit that I'm aware of, and Ondra's onsight of Bat Route is the hardest overall.
Also of note is Pete Dawson's flash of 32 at chee dale cornice (though with the slight caveat that he'd climbed R'n'P before, so not a proper flash). Chris webb-parsons also flashed The Brute on the Diamond in wales which is the hardest in Wales I think.
As a matter of interest what's your view on the use of 'onsight' and/or 'flash' (as distinct from beta flash) for most current high performing climbers?
As I understand it the typical usage in the uk is
I don't think beta flash is in common usage in the UK. Could be wrong though, I haven't asked everyone!
I guess I'm thinking about it pretty hard to escape some beta when amongst people with similar aims, sometimes being at the crag at the same time as others are on the route and the prevalence of videos of top ascents. I thought you were using onsight and flash as synonyms and wondered about any subtle differences in actual use by those climbing the top grades.
Does anyone seriously use onsight and flash as synonyms? My understanding is entirely in line with Remus'. Beta flash- I have never even heard of this, is it a 90s term or what?
I know that a pink beta flash sight can get you put on a register these days.
I think this is generally accepted. E.g. when Ondra was on his mission to be the first to 'flash' 9a+, he was getting beta from everyone and watching videos of other people on the routes.
I once had a convo with a guy at a crag saying that they were "glad they got the pinkpoint as they didn't think they could have got the full redpoint".
At the time I had no idea what they were talking about so just nodded and agreed...
> Does anyone seriously use onsight and flash as synonyms? My understanding is entirely in line with Remus'. Beta flash- I have never even heard of this, is it a 90s term or what?
There was indeed a phase in the early 90s where (in some circles at least) "flash" simply meant first try, which could then be qualified as onsight or with beta. But modern usage is universally per Remus's description in my experience.
Also I think everyone accepts it can be quite hard in practice not to have *any* prior knowledge - its a question of how strict you want to be (and if you're claiming onsights at the cutting edge then you probably need to be stricter than Joe Public on a 7a+).
I can understand your guy's comment. In his terms pinkpoint means climbing it with the draws in place, redpoint means placing the draws on lead - both after prior practice
Lots of routes this makes no or little difference but there's plenty of routes where draws in place is vastly easier
> Chris webb-parsons also flashed The Brute on the Diamond in wales which is the hardest in Wales I think.
Jim Pope onsighted this too in the last couple of years IIRC, so I imagine that's the hardest OS in Wales.
Yeah I know, I looked it up afterwards!
It's certainly often easier to climb a route with the draws pre-placed, but I think most people no longer make the distinction between red/pink and just call everything a redpoint regardless or not of if the draws were in or not....
Yes, no-one on the hardest redpoints nowadays places quickdraws on lead.
It seems a bit petty to quibble about whether draws are in or out when someone has drilled bolts into the rock.
I've only ever heard of pink-pointing when referring to trad with the gear already in, where it makes a pretty big difference!
Agreed. I don't think I've ever seen the likes of Sharma or Ondra place a draw ever!
I think it's because no-one really liked the term pinkpoint
> Does anyone seriously use onsight and flash as synonyms? My understanding is entirely in line with Remus'.
Agreed, the vast majority of climbers who are vaguely serious about sport climbing understands the difference. At the top level I think climbers are pretty careful to avoid beta/videos etc if they're planning to attempt a high end onsight.
And in reply to the op Simon Nadin on-sighted The Groove and Urgent Action (both 8a+) in 1990, pretty sure first time that grade was o/s in UK and possibly had to wait until Steve Mac came on the scene to see that mark improved.
Anyone know what the first 8a and 8b o/s in UK were? Nadin did Statement of Youth (8a) in later 80s but I think that was a flash.
I always joke that my memory is so bad it's all on-sight for me anyway!
Once in Kalymnos:
"Why don't you give that one another try Greg? You've not got that clean yet"
(I send it clean)
"Yeah I can see why I had trouble with that last year, it's tricky, but I've got a lot better since then"
"Greg, you tried it for the first time two days ago..."
> Jim Pope onsighted this too in the last couple of years IIRC, so I imagine that's the hardest OS in Wales.
Good knowledge, looks like it was september a couple of years ago that he did it https://climbing-history.org/climb/315
Hello Remus,
That site is great. How about adding a notable flash/onsight list?
Paul
Glad you like it I'd be really keen to add a list like that but currently the underlying info is a bit sparse. Any suggestions for notable onsight/flash ascents greatly received.
Pinkpointing was actually what redpointing was originally. In France if you fell you'd get back on, go to the top and strip all the draws out. Then try again later, putting them as you go.
On harder routes it was quite an effort to keep going to the top of the route each time. Some routes, particularly longer ones, it was not very practical either (they could be hard and time consuming to strip for example). So I think it was a natural evolution based on practicality and getting up things more quickly that lead to the leaving the draws in.
I always thought that pinkpointing was when you led a trad route on preplaced gear, therefore turning it into a sport route?
I thought it was having the rope pre-clipped on your 'redpoint' attempt. Shows how impractical a term it is!
> I always thought that pinkpointing was when you led a trad route on preplaced gear, therefore turning it into a sport route?
That should definitely be called a 'yellowpoint'.
> I always thought that pinkpointing was when you led a trad route on preplaced gear, therefore turning it into a sport route?
I think that’s the only place I’ve seen it used recently, although I think originally as others have said it also applied to a “worked sport ascent with draws already in situ”.
Pinkpoint must have originally happened when somebody did a redpoint with pre-placed draws and others must have complained that it was easier than placing them on lead so a separate term was coined.
Obviously, it didn't stick very well otherwise nobody would be wondering what it meant.
Similarly flash could originally be either on-sight flash or beta flash, both referring to getting up the route first time without weighting the rope, etc. You could also do an on-sight that wasn't a flash over several attempts - although I'm not sure whether you had to down climb between attempts or whether lowering off and pulling ropes was ok.
Nowadays on-sight always means first go (originally on-sight flash), and a flash assumes beta (originally beta flash). We also have ground-up to cover an ascent over several attempts although it's not always clear whether that involves beta or not (and few will care since it's "status" is usually lower than on-sight or flash).
One still grey area (I think) is whether downclimbing without weighting and then re-ascending invalidates the on-sight or flash. I think most would say yes, since downclimbing and going again isn't really first attempt - in which case it then becomes "merely" ground-up.
Luckily climbing has loads of confusing and mutating terms to keep us amused on our keyboards 😁
How about just asking around in the usual places and seeing what comes up? Then once people are aware of the list you might get more info.
I am certain I won't feature on it
Pink pointing is actually a redundant term which was used before people actually knew any better.
A pink point was a complete lead of a route but the rope was allowed to be left in the highest piece of gear clipped from a previous attempt.
ie - a route is climbed from the ground up to the forth bolt then fallen off, the climber then is lower to the ground but the rope is left in the forth bolt. the route is then lead (in effect top roping to the forth bolt) clean to the belay. It never really caught on but some notable ascents were made in this way.
Not in my case. It just meant the draws were in place on a sports route for when you had a go at leading it. It was an acknowledgement that it was a bit softer than clipping the draws into the bolts and so on.
Never heard of it at all on any trad route.It was just a phrase for sports climbing.
Isn't it great that lots of us know the term pinkpoint and we have many different definitions for it
You have just described a Yoyo ascent.
Pinkpoints are correctly described above. The term is now redundant for sport climbing, but very occasionally still used for trad. Nowadays we would more often say something more specific like 'crucial wires pre-placed'.
Yeah that is a bit of a grey area - I think that's why when you see people have completed a hard trad route they'll often add a note like "all gear placed on lead" etc...
No, that's a yo-yo.
> One still grey area (I think) is whether downclimbing without weighting and then re-ascending invalidates the on-sight or flash. I think most would say yes, since downclimbing and going again isn't really first attempt - in which case it then becomes "merely" ground-up.
Really?!?!
I know noone who would say that reversing cleanly to the ground invalidates an onsight or flash.
It doesn't become ground up until you fall off.
I dunno, if I jumped on, tried the first move, realised I've got my starting holds wrong so reversed back cleanly and started again I think I'd call it an onsight...
But if I climbed a few moves up, maybe even clipped the first bolt of two then climbed back down clean and started again then I think I'd consider that a flash.
What are other people's thoughts on that? Happy to upgrade some of my flashes to onsights if that's the consensus!
> What are other people's thoughts on that? Happy to upgrade some of my flashes to onsights if that's the consensus!
If you want to deny yourself the onsight as a result of downclimbing from the first bolt you go for it, but you're taking an unnecessarily punitive view!
Consider the ground as just a ledge or any other resting position. If you reverse a few moves to a rest for a rethink, surely you wouldn't consider that a failure? The ground really is no different.
We have rules/styles/ethics in our sport to keep things fair, responsible and challenging. Rules that ultimately don't make sense diminish our sport rather than enhance it.
There have been a couple of threads about whether you can down climb to the ground and preserve the onsight.
Opinion seemed to be evenly split on UKC, although there is a consensus that you can amongst hard UK trad climbers, and that you can't among European sport climbers.
Fair enough I'll consider the times I've done this an onsight then, if that's the consensus!
So in summary:
If I stood on the ground and watched someone climb to the second bolt I'm getting beta so, strictly speaking, the onsight is gone and I can only flash it after that.
But if I climb to the second bolt, figure out the holds and moves and gain a load of beta then downclimb and start again, that is an onsight?
What was that that you were saying about rules that don't make sense?
Which part of that are you suggesting doesn't make sense? You've learned everything yourself. You haven't fallen off, hung or lowered. Why on earth should you consider yourself to have failed already?
The whole idea of not being able to return to the ground was introduced in the early days of competitions, and it was done purely to speed things up so they didn't get boring for spectators and reduced the ludicrous isolation times that were common in those days. That seems to be why this attitude has become more common among sport climbers than trad climbers. I really don't see what the relevance is to either sport or trad climbing, as there's no audience and no tv schedule to keep happy.
If the beta you gained via an up-and-down-climb was useful, you probably had to work for it - you had to figure it out and then climb back downwards through at least part of what you worked out to return to the ground. There was always a risk you'd fall off and blow it.
If you watched someone else, you got it for free.
Fair point yes, that is a difference isn't it?
That makes more sense now.
I guess that didn't make sense to me was that in the (admittedly contrived) example I gave the person who made the Onsight would have more knowledge of the bottom of the route than the person who made the flash, but then I hadn't considered that I could have fallen whilst getting that beta, so that makes sense.
If I ever bothered logging any of my climbs in the database I'd start making some alterations!
So you climb half-way up, then down climb, go home, have a sleep, come back the next day, climb to just below the top, down climb, go home, have a sleep, recover, come back the next day and climb to the top - is that still on-sight?
(you can pull the ropes or keep them clipped, whichever is required to fit the desired ethic)
The absurdity can of course be extended much further than that. If you're going to allow climbing to the ground and then back up again for the on-sight then I think it should be limited to a single session or maybe limited by having to remain tied on.
If we're going for edge scenarios, they're no more extreme than saying you lose an onsight for downclimbing from 2 moves up, are they? That's pretty absurd.
Or saying that you lose the onsight for reversing 6 feet to the ground at the bottom whilst saying that it's perfectly legit to climb back down a few moves to a sit down rest once you're part way up? That's pretty absurd.
I feel like saying someone who is capable of more or less doing a full up-and-down of the route (your top example) is achieving something less than someone who can just climb to the top of it once is pretty absurd. I can't imagine downclimbing any of my hardest ascents. Can you, really?
Arbitrary limits, such as your single-session requirement, are just that: arbitrary. I don't see why people seem to find the need to try to impose them on a system that works perfectly well without. Of course, doing a route in one session will often be more impressive than reversing to the ground and coming back another day, but I really don't see why it needs a whole different category to describe what is fundamentally the same achievement.
When dave m climbed rhapsody, didn't he climb up the crack putting his gear in, downclimb, go home for a cuppa, then come back and polish it off? I'm sure I heard that somewhere.
Not the same as on sighting as such but same principal for his clean first ascent.
Just imagine the rope wasn't there. If you don't use it, it's all good.
> When dave m climbed rhapsody, didn't he climb up the crack putting his gear in, downclimb, go home for a cuppa, then come back and polish it off? I'm sure I heard that somewhere.
You're probably thinking of his ascent of A Muerte in spain where he was downclimbing a significant proportion of it before going for a complete burn to the top. It got a bit of attention at the time. I think some spanish climbers where particularly critical.
The second BMC Members Open Forum webinar took place on 20 March. Recently-appointed BMC CEO Paul Ratcliffe, President Andy Syme and Chair Roger Murray shared updates on staff changes, new and ongoing initiatives, insurance policy changes and the current...