Le date si riferiscono al giorno di inserimento delle notizie.
Alcuni chiarimenti su Gioia
(16/03/2015)
(16/03/2015)
Riportiamo alcuni chiarimenti riguardo la recente rottura e successiva chiusura di un nuovo appoggio su "Gioia", a Varazze.
Un breve riassunto:
Durante i tentativi da parte di Daniel Woods, Dave Graham e Dan Beall, si è verificata la rottura di un piccolo appoggio, finora mai utilizzato da nessuno dei salitori (non pochi, in quanto l'appoggio si trova nella seconda parte del boulder, lo 'stand-start' di 8A+). L'appoggio, situato in una sezione di roccia fragile, veniva dagli stessi spazzolato e ingrandito.
(Maggiori dettagli riguardo Gioia nell' intervento di Adam Ondra, in inglese)
Su 8a.nu Christian Core spiega le motivazioni che lo hanno portato a richiudere il nuovo appoggio:
Gioia controversy based on a misunderstanding?
GIOIA (Italiano)
Dopo i tentativi di Daniel Woods e Dave Graham ho sistemato l'appoggio "nuovo" uscito dopo la rottura accidentale della roccia, in un punto mai usato del blocco, nella seconda sezione di Gioia.
Ora il blocco è a posto, ed esattamente uguale a prima, quando l'ho liberato e poi ripetuto da Adam Ondra e Nalle Hukkataival.
Gli appoggi originali sono sempre gli stessi, quello nuovo apparso era fragile e prossimo ad un'altra rottura, ora non c'è più.
Non uso mai colla specifica per "riparare" i blocchi, non è mia abitudine perchè non mi piace, ma Gioia, come boulder importante meritava di essere ripristinato perchè tornasse ad essere di nuovo uguale per tutti coloro che vogliono provarlo e per rispetto agli scalatori che l'hanno provato in passato.
GIOIA (English)
After Daniel Woods and Dave Graham's attempts at sending Gioia, today I fixed the new foothold which resulted from the accidental breaking off of a piece of rock in a section of the boulder that had never been used before - section 2 of Gioia.
Now the line is back to its original state, exactly as it was when I first climbed it and when Adam Ondra and Nalle Hukkataival did their repetitions.
The original footholds are always the same; the new one was frail and would have easily broken again.
I never use purpose made glue to fix these kind of issues, it's not a practice I like.
However, due to its aknowledged importance, Gioia deserved to be restored to its original line so that it could be again equal to every climber who has tried it in the past and will try it in the future.
Adam Ondra esprime la sua opinione a riguardo nel forum di 8a.nu:
Gioia controversy - What do you think?
"I would like to put my two cents into the discussion. I would like to add my opinion and facts into the discussion. I have been in contact with Christian about this issue.
Gioia has 7 hard moves in total (I exclude rather easy top out, but even up there it is possible to fall). First four moves could be like soft 8B+ on its own, stand start has three hard moves which is 8A+ and has many ascents.
Gioa has a couple glued holds. But do not imagine a wall full of sika, but a few reinforced crimps with fluid super glue. I am pretty sure that unless you are told, you would never notice any glue at all. The crimps would probably hold for a certain period of time even without the glue, but in order mantain the state of the problem forever, the glue was used. And I have no problem with that.
The hardest single move is the second move. And this is where Dave or Daniel found a kneebar. Good for them. Nobody has a problem with that. They found something that none of us had seen before. At the same time, I am not the one to judge how much this kneebar helps (if it changes the grade?) as I have never tried it this way. As even Henning typed above, there is absolutely no controversy about this kneebar.
The linking crux of the whole boulder for me was definitely last hard move, i.e. move number 3 on the stand start. It is not very hard as a single move, but it is very spicy in the link from the start, because it is heinously powerful move. Christian used very bad right foot for this move, whereas me and Nalle we both used a smearing foot high left. The stand start has numerous ascents and nothing had ever been broken there. Until a few weeks ago.
Daniel and Dave in this move used a foothold which has not been used before. Just because it was obviosly loose and fragile. Obviously you can blame Christian for insufficient cleaning, but he simply would not bother to clean it. And I would do the same. When climbing on well established route or boulder, I do not use holds or footholds which are sure be broken. And 100+ climbers who did or attemped the stand start did not use this loose foothold.
The loose foothold broke and better foothold appeared underneath. A bit more solid-looking, but still very questionable. A foothold was much better than the one that Christian used and made the last move less powerful. Which is very crucial for Gioia low. Because the foothold still looked like it could break again, Christian decided to tap the foothold with sika. He could not have hammered it down, because another (possibly even better?) foothold could have appeared underneath. Which could happen even if no action was taken by Christian. If I were him, I would probably do the same. It is not chipping, it is not creating an eliminate, it is not harming the aestethics of the line.
It is always hard to decide what to do with loose holds. As long as it is somewhere high in the mountains, where you are expected to climb on crumbly rock, it is not a problem if the route change after every ascent. But on famous boulder problem like Gioia? You have three options. Cover the hold (or hammer it down if possible), reinforce it or leave it as it is and wait until it breaks again (and then possibly again and again?). In all three cases, you are somehow manipulating the rock (even though indirectly in the third case)
He chose the first option, because he wanted all the climbers in the future to enjoy the Gioia as it used to be. Dave and Daniel should definitely respect what he did. It is his boulder problem and local area. It is not that Christian could not stand the fact that Dave and Daniel were smart enough to find a new beta or found a new foothold. It is what happened in the second move with the kneebar and he is perfectly fine with that. Daniel and Dave used a foothold which has not used before from a reason - because it was loose."
Un breve riassunto:
Durante i tentativi da parte di Daniel Woods, Dave Graham e Dan Beall, si è verificata la rottura di un piccolo appoggio, finora mai utilizzato da nessuno dei salitori (non pochi, in quanto l'appoggio si trova nella seconda parte del boulder, lo 'stand-start' di 8A+). L'appoggio, situato in una sezione di roccia fragile, veniva dagli stessi spazzolato e ingrandito.
(Maggiori dettagli riguardo Gioia nell' intervento di Adam Ondra, in inglese)
Su 8a.nu Christian Core spiega le motivazioni che lo hanno portato a richiudere il nuovo appoggio:
Gioia controversy based on a misunderstanding?
GIOIA (Italiano)
Dopo i tentativi di Daniel Woods e Dave Graham ho sistemato l'appoggio "nuovo" uscito dopo la rottura accidentale della roccia, in un punto mai usato del blocco, nella seconda sezione di Gioia.
Ora il blocco è a posto, ed esattamente uguale a prima, quando l'ho liberato e poi ripetuto da Adam Ondra e Nalle Hukkataival.
Gli appoggi originali sono sempre gli stessi, quello nuovo apparso era fragile e prossimo ad un'altra rottura, ora non c'è più.
Non uso mai colla specifica per "riparare" i blocchi, non è mia abitudine perchè non mi piace, ma Gioia, come boulder importante meritava di essere ripristinato perchè tornasse ad essere di nuovo uguale per tutti coloro che vogliono provarlo e per rispetto agli scalatori che l'hanno provato in passato.
GIOIA (English)
After Daniel Woods and Dave Graham's attempts at sending Gioia, today I fixed the new foothold which resulted from the accidental breaking off of a piece of rock in a section of the boulder that had never been used before - section 2 of Gioia.
Now the line is back to its original state, exactly as it was when I first climbed it and when Adam Ondra and Nalle Hukkataival did their repetitions.
The original footholds are always the same; the new one was frail and would have easily broken again.
I never use purpose made glue to fix these kind of issues, it's not a practice I like.
However, due to its aknowledged importance, Gioia deserved to be restored to its original line so that it could be again equal to every climber who has tried it in the past and will try it in the future.
Adam Ondra esprime la sua opinione a riguardo nel forum di 8a.nu:
Gioia controversy - What do you think?
"I would like to put my two cents into the discussion. I would like to add my opinion and facts into the discussion. I have been in contact with Christian about this issue.
Gioia has 7 hard moves in total (I exclude rather easy top out, but even up there it is possible to fall). First four moves could be like soft 8B+ on its own, stand start has three hard moves which is 8A+ and has many ascents.
Gioa has a couple glued holds. But do not imagine a wall full of sika, but a few reinforced crimps with fluid super glue. I am pretty sure that unless you are told, you would never notice any glue at all. The crimps would probably hold for a certain period of time even without the glue, but in order mantain the state of the problem forever, the glue was used. And I have no problem with that.
The hardest single move is the second move. And this is where Dave or Daniel found a kneebar. Good for them. Nobody has a problem with that. They found something that none of us had seen before. At the same time, I am not the one to judge how much this kneebar helps (if it changes the grade?) as I have never tried it this way. As even Henning typed above, there is absolutely no controversy about this kneebar.
The linking crux of the whole boulder for me was definitely last hard move, i.e. move number 3 on the stand start. It is not very hard as a single move, but it is very spicy in the link from the start, because it is heinously powerful move. Christian used very bad right foot for this move, whereas me and Nalle we both used a smearing foot high left. The stand start has numerous ascents and nothing had ever been broken there. Until a few weeks ago.
Daniel and Dave in this move used a foothold which has not been used before. Just because it was obviosly loose and fragile. Obviously you can blame Christian for insufficient cleaning, but he simply would not bother to clean it. And I would do the same. When climbing on well established route or boulder, I do not use holds or footholds which are sure be broken. And 100+ climbers who did or attemped the stand start did not use this loose foothold.
The loose foothold broke and better foothold appeared underneath. A bit more solid-looking, but still very questionable. A foothold was much better than the one that Christian used and made the last move less powerful. Which is very crucial for Gioia low. Because the foothold still looked like it could break again, Christian decided to tap the foothold with sika. He could not have hammered it down, because another (possibly even better?) foothold could have appeared underneath. Which could happen even if no action was taken by Christian. If I were him, I would probably do the same. It is not chipping, it is not creating an eliminate, it is not harming the aestethics of the line.
It is always hard to decide what to do with loose holds. As long as it is somewhere high in the mountains, where you are expected to climb on crumbly rock, it is not a problem if the route change after every ascent. But on famous boulder problem like Gioia? You have three options. Cover the hold (or hammer it down if possible), reinforce it or leave it as it is and wait until it breaks again (and then possibly again and again?). In all three cases, you are somehow manipulating the rock (even though indirectly in the third case)
He chose the first option, because he wanted all the climbers in the future to enjoy the Gioia as it used to be. Dave and Daniel should definitely respect what he did. It is his boulder problem and local area. It is not that Christian could not stand the fact that Dave and Daniel were smart enough to find a new beta or found a new foothold. It is what happened in the second move with the kneebar and he is perfectly fine with that. Daniel and Dave used a foothold which has not used before from a reason - because it was loose."
