When is a route "run out?"

[daniel banquo merrick]

Is one bolt along an otherwise not protectable, 190' 5.4 pitch run out?

Let me ask a more open question and perhaps we can get some sort of consensus.

How would you define run out on a sustained 5.6 pitch? Assume there is no significant traverse, route finding difficulties  or other peculiarities.

[NateD]

O boy, I imagine getting consensus on this will be nigh impossible. Very subjective. But I'll bite.
25+ feet on sustained 5.6 could perhaps be R. It's kinda hard, even for a beginner, I would think, to fall on 5.6 slab if you are paying attention. Steeper 5.6 terrain may warrant more protection.

If it was a 5.4 route with only 1 bolt in 190', I'd probably say R. If it was a 5.4 pitch with only 1 bolt in 190' on a multipitch climb with harder terrain and stiffer grade on the other pitches, than no R. But what do I know? Just my 2 cents.

[susan]

Is one bolt along an otherwise not protectable, 190' 5.4 pitch run out?

I think so.

I would consider factor 2 falls and where bolts are located in relation to possible decking.

[YETI]

If the route is 5.4, and you have a 190ft pitch of 5.4 with one bolt, it is runout in my book.

If the route were 5.6 and the 5.4 pitch had one bolt in 190 feet I would label the "pitch" 5.4 R not the route.

[John]

I think it is all very relative to each specific situation. I think of a story about how a supreme court justice was asked to define what pornography is for a case. His reply was "I don't know how to define it but I know it when I see it". These definitions don't fall neatly into their places do they?

I tend to focus on the rating of the pitch in question in relation to the overall rating. Assume that some day the climb will be done by someone who's maximum skill level is near the overall difficulty of the climb, like a 5.7 climber doing a 5.7 climb. At that level, 5.4 is still proportionally near their limit as compared to a 5.10 climber doing a 5.4.

Besides, rating a climb with an "R" is the sure death of any chance of the route ever getting climbed anyhow!

[mungeclimber]

The standard principle many of the folks I know use: If a competent leader at the grade would find the crux inadequately protected (e.g. a Factor 2 fall possibility, or ledge out) to prevent serious injury, then it gets an R.   

So, if the route is rated 5.4, and the crux is 5.4 and the rest 5.3, then in theory a bolt/good pro at the crux could make the overall danger rating PG, and not R.

If the route is rated 5.4, and the crux is 5.4 with no bolt/good pro anywhere near the crux, then the route should be R, and likely X if no protection anywhere else on the route.

R is often a result of definition by guidebook authors, since it is a descriptor of the relative danger. There isn't an objective "R" standard to appeal to, just many historical uses of the R rating over time. That is still meaningful, but there needs to be some definitional quality communicated first for it to have meaning.

[NateD]

Besides, rating a climb with an "R" is the sure death of any chance of the route ever getting climbed anyhow!

And getting more than one or two stars.

[susan]

Except South Crack or The Great Pumpkin in Tuolomne. Snake Dike on Half Dome. Still a number of popular routes with R ratings.

[DaveyTree]

I gues it depends on the rock as well. Is it slabby face that you would slide down with minimal chance of tumbling? Then the R stands more for roughed up. If there is a shelf or features to cause injury then the R means more of a Rutrow(in a scooby-doo voice).

I typically don't have an issue running stuff out if it is well within my range, although I was a bit nervous toward the top of 70' of 5.8 runout at the top of Watership Down on Sunday since a fall would slung me into the book.

If FAing, R is often part of the game at times but I will come back and add bolts to make it safer. The last thing I ever want to hear is that someone climbed one of my routes and got seriously injured or died as a result of me not puting in an extra bolt or two.

How many times have we been told a route was 'great' by someone only to get on it and think WTF!? and you got into some sketch spots. Either the person who told you about it sand bagged to look cool or is a stud and didn't know better.

That's just me tho

[YETI]

Sanbaggery is an art both in the climbing and the delivery around the fire.


There are some pro sandbaggers around...

[mungeclimber]

make sure those retro bolts are painted pink!! 

 

[DaveyTree]

I think bright orange would be more appropriate to warn of upcoming dangerous crux section....haha.

Never retro just after an FA where I didn't want to stop and drill cause of stances.

Side thought: what about doing a climb and describing the pro by the size of monkey fists needed. 1 x 10mm 4 loop M.F.
                                   3 x 8mm 4 loop M.F.
                                   2 x 7mm 3 loop M.F.
                                   4 x 5mm 3 loops M.F.
                                   10 med. + 4 long slings for knobs and chocks

I am feeling it.

[daniel banquo merrick]

The 5.4 pitch I have in mind may not be 5.4 of course. Anything below 5.8 is pretty hard for me to determine. I'm pretty sure I know where 5.9 starts when I climb because that's where I think I might or actually do fall. The second ascent leader of this pitch felt it could use another bolt which leads me to suspect it is run out so perhaps it is.

I guess it has to with how you feel as you climb the route. Moving above a bolt or piece of gear goes something like this for me:

1) I feel secure and confident that if I pop off it will be OK and perhaps just funny.
2) I am aware of how far away the last piece is.
3) I am looking for and pretty focused on where the next placement will be.
4) I am really wishing I had a placement and don't know what will happen if I fall.
5) I'm uncomfortable and curse the nut case that put up the route.
6) Holy shite! I plead with the belayer to please reel in slack if I fall - he'll have plenty of time to do so.
7) Throw all caution to the wind and sprint for the anchor/placement/ledge.

I think runout is somewhere around 4 or 5.

[John]

One observation I have made in the definition of "runout" is that it can't be defined strictly by the distance between protection points. I believe that some FAists focus on "feet between bolts" too closely because is sounds so bad on paper and in discussion but is not a big deal in reality.

Example: If there was a magical number of feet that everyone agreed that you should never fall, let's say 30', then that would mean that there would have to be gear or bolts at least every 15'. The majority of routes would require more bolts on terrain that most climbers wouldn't have otherwise given any thought about. And you would get that feeling of "I feel silly stopping to clip this bolt" more often than ever. Is that so bad? I suppose not, but overall I believe it is still best to at least try and be a minimalist with bolting. Less is more just feels right.

[NateD]

I like your list of progressive thought processes there, Dan. That resonates. Sure enough, everyone's comfort level is different - some even enjoy the fear and then the subsequent high/relief of finally gaining the next bolt or pro. Their point of reaching thought #4 or #5 is well beyond others. I personally enjoy that sense of relief, but do not relish in fear. There's a fine line where it can definitely just feel stupid and irresponsible, not fun anymore, and that varies for each person.

It's like the statement John quoted "I know it when I see it", 'cept it's "I know it when I climb it".

I'm glad there are a variety of routes out there for many different tastes.