@TheFool glad the photos are helpful. I was worried I'd have too many of them, but I think it helps show different aspects of terrain that would fall into categories. I tried picking shots with someone active in them (mostly my partner as I take more photos) vs just terrain itself to give that feeling of moving through it.
I've done pinnacles basin to Simpson meadow three times (once going over to turret lakes and cutting to the PCT, twice going to three note as Secor wrote up though I didn't know it at the time). Some people really like to avoid the patches of talus on the way to pinnacles basin east, I went over them my second time and didn't mind them at all as they were stable, nicely sized, and low angle - the aspen nearby I hit the first time trying to avoid them I found far more annoying! Everyone has their own preferences.
Gardiner Basin (from col to pass) back in 14 was exhausting with all the undergrowth and I doubt I'll ever do Murro Blanco unless it's fall of a low winter so I can just easily hike down the creek. I've met some people in the southwest that actually enjoy bushbashing, which seems bizarre to me especially given all the pokey things there.
Glad you liked the 1 R example - I do think it’s worth pointing out that class 1 can feel sketchy (but it’s also super simple). There’s a narrow patch on the shepherd’s pass trail that is 1 R (and it usually holds snow), and parts of Granite Park trail have 2.5 mantles in them. There’s an exposed portion of the switches up at lees ferry near glen canyon that scares people - singletrack super flat but a sheer drop on the side!
Not sure I want to rate trails, but it’s more useful to just think of how one moves over terrain as it’s own thing vs calling class 2 class 4 because it’s exposed, anything on trail 1 and anything off 2+ etc.
@michaelzim yeah, photos aren't perfect. I tried to be a bit more objective in the difference between R and X on the main page, but in the end someone who is extremely sensitive to exposure will avoid both, while most experienced people should be fine with R as long as it's not also skidding ala King Col. For the terrain modifiers actually having some short video clips would probably be useful like on the bottom of the page @
https://www.rei.com/learn/expert-advice ... ering.html but that's not something that occurred to me before doing this.
Jimr wrote: ↑Tue Feb 21, 2023 7:26 pm
Both Google Earth and ratings set by others leave a lot to be desired. You can get a glimpse using both, but it comes down to what you see in the field and how you pick your route. One person's class two is another person's load in the pants. Give or take a quart.
I agree with that in spirit, which is part of the reason I think it's useful to put in some modifiers to help put things on different axii. I did a lot of passes without even knowing what they were called, the majority of others just with Secor's terse beta, and a number of nameless ones that just looked good on topo. As someone who is fine doing the vast majority of passes with just topo and a good paragraph or two of text, I find "Class 2" fairly useless as it is now. Having Secor just say Ursula is class 2 doesn't tell me anything, and plenty of Class 2 passes are "worse" than Class 3. A well written guide is more useful than a rating, but the two can and should exist together and people can obviously check other resources as well. I do think a rating system that works on multiple axii can be useful for determine if someone is off-route in a meaningful way at the very least - one shouldn't be getting into Class 3-4 on Cirque Pass. Similarly if someone sees a pass is rated PG and is on fatally exposed X terrain they'd think it might be time to backtrack. Obviously there's a lot of different minor route-finding choices that people can make based on their own preferences, and I don't think simple parts of a pass need to be over explained as route finding choices are part of the fun, but there's definitely a few moments where having a more accurate rating alone would have made a big difference going over a pass otherwise blind!
I've seen photos here of relatively high angle talus that someone calls class 1 but could be class 2 for others. I would still label talus I can jog across without needing hands for balance class 2 terrain regardless of my personal experience on it. I'm no Roper and do not presume to be, but I can try to take a step back from my own personal experience like he did and try and describe things in a consistent manner.
My partner and I more comfortable with exposure than most, but my partner is far less comfortable with collapsing terrain than I am. Being able to see that Rodgers is 2 C and Vernon 2 R + 2.5 would lead people to different conclusions of which to focus on without having to spend hours digging through trip reports.
I'm sure there will regularly be people that feel a 2.5 is a 3, or a 2 a 2.5, or an R and X and vice versa, but there's less wiggle room there between the current system and any proposed alternatives I've seen.
It's not perfect, it's still an abstraction, but at least it'll be a better abstraction and it won't be living in a vacuum. Updated systems have been proposed and fizzled out before, and realistically it's probably more likely than not this will as well, but it's still something I think is worth testing out.
rlown wrote: ↑Mon Feb 20, 2023 8:45 pm
have you ever just looked at a pass and said "my target is on the other side." Rating is overrated. You go, you see, and you make adjustments according to conditions. You do trip prep and pre planning and adjust as you go. I could care less what you put forward in ratings. BOG is where it happens.
You walk 100 yds, look, think, and move higher.
Sure, the ones that pop out from the last summer we did a blind aside from Secor re-route over Midway mountain due to losing time to a snowstorm + earlier wanderings around Sphinx Lakes based on Kim Stanley Robinson's advice it was simpler than the passes nearby, went up to ladder/hester blind aside from Secor (and disregarded his chute to ladder and found a way that we liked more), went up to 10565 blind and over into Dumbbell basin as I'd wanting to get there since seeing it back in '17 from observation peak, and decided to drop down Cartridge Creek after looking at it from the ridge near Red Peak on a very fluid trip during a tropical storm that we had two days with basically no mileage before that (again disregarding Secor's advice on creek crossings, I think he was trying to recreate the old mule trail + undergrowth has changed over time). I've gone over a lot of nameless passes further north in the range mid-trip - I'd actually plan out a trip and add a day or two to account for excursions of whimsy before I knew about Secor, HST, or that many of the ones I went over had names or were part of the SHR etc.
That said ratings can be a part of the trip prep you mentioned, to reduce time by helping narrowing your focus and if done well can create a more consistent mental model of what you'll encounter (within reason, they're an abstraction, etc).
You've voiced dismissive criticism here multiple times now and I think we all get the picture. I personally don't use google earth and am fine using topo, brief descriptions I can trust, and my eyes as I've described earlier in the thread. Different people find different things useful. This system was born of me thinking about how to describe passes I've done to people with questions about them and finding current YDS inadequate - I made most of it up as I went along as my own shorthand. Plenty of climbers find value in having something be 5.10a III R, and canyoneering people have their own multi-axis system breaking up technique/equipment required, water, and time. Others may not, that's fine. Feel free to ignore it since it seems to trigger you.
