I'm not going to write a full review of the book, but I am going to have a rant about one thing which really bothers me about the new 'Rockfax version of our guidebook'. That is the re-grading of Tigers Wall and Wilfred Prickles... HVS?... I dont think so!

Yes, we all know that both routes are hard, bold, tough, necky, at the VS grade, but that is because they are true, classic, excellent, showpeices of the Northumberland VS grade, not because they are HVS's!

Along with Rothley Crack and Lorraine they are the most classic of classic VS's in Northumberland, they are the test piece VS's, the VS's which confirm that you are a VS climber, the VS's which are at the top of every aspiring VS leaders wish list, the VS's which you get scared on and down climb and then try again another day, they are the VS's that people take their first leader falls on, but survive with the wake up call that they are moving into serious ground, they are the VS's that seperate the men from the boys!

They are two of our best routes, but do they belong in the same grade as Great Wall, Coldstream Corner, The Arches, Quartz Buttress, Callerhues Crack, Canada Crack? no... they don't. They belong with their fellow VS's, Rothley Crack and Lorraine, and Tacitation, and Tigers Overhang, and Marcher Lord!

Come on Rockfax, Who gave you the right to re-write history?


oh, by the way, a note to Climb Magazine - The NMC have been producing a climbing guide since 1950, with an up-to-date, definitive guide just 4 years ago!

I agree entirely about the grades, but don't get SteveO started on Tigers wall! Re the Climb thing, a letter from the NMC is winging it's way to the editor.

Andy Birtwistle's written a review here:

http://www.climbonline.co.uk/reviews.htm

Oh Yes. Wilfred Prickles .. definitely VS and not overly taxing either but does depend on thought & technique..

So what's the story with the 'Climb' magazine? I take it they've said something controversial (or just plain wrong?)

R

RobS wrote:

QUOTE:
Oh Yes. Wilfred Prickles .. definitely VS and not overly taxing either but does depend on thought & technique..
R

Definitely just needs a bit of thought, the whole wall is covered in flakes, its probably possible to place a whole set of nuts every metre (if you've got the stamina!).


Climb magazine have done a review of the book, I haven't got the magazine to hand but they pretty much said that the new rockfax guide is a 'much needed' guidebook for an area 'historically ill served by guidebooks'!

QUOTE:
ts probably possible to place a whole set of nuts every metre

Yes I think you could be right - I believe I got six nuts in and 2 friends which is overkill even on half ropes.

QUOTE:
..a 'much needed' guidebook for an area 'historically ill served by guidebooks'!

Ah - printing utter bollocks then ..

plenty of nuts up the flakes and cams at the top break, I just did it last week its about right for VS - certainly not HVS!

Wilfred - VS. Keep

Tiger's Wall - you're right. Shouldn't be HVS 5a. It should be E1 5a. I led it at BMC's festival first time in my life. The crux is over before you can get any gear. You may as well solo it. Definitely E1 in my book; not HVS nor VS. VS 5a suggests bomber gear but the bomber gear only occurs half way up after the crux. I can't call that VS 5a. The committment part is not reflected on the adjectival grade.

Two other E1 5a routes come to mind to compare my theory on Tiger's Wall.
1) Three Peebles on Froggatt. It's E1 5a because the gear is crap up to the crux. Once you get over the crux, it's all over. You don't need any more gear if there is any.
2) Satan's Slip on Devil Slide on Lundy. It's E1 5a as well. On the crux pitch, 25m run-out on one piece of gear - my no. 4 Zero cam (for aiding rather protection) before you get to the corner for some bomber gear. I wouldn't call it VS 5a even it's a slab. Very committing. Same kind of pressure you get on Three Peebles (it's a bit shorter runout) and Tiger's Wall.

Tigers wall E1????? 5a crux at 2 metres then a jugfest to the flake for another couple of metres then vdiff. If it stopped at the flake it'd be a boulder problem. VS is spot on, IMHO. It's one of the few routes at Bowden I've soloed. I thought it was a grade easier then Prickles. I agree with you on the slab thing though, I've done long runout slabs and they are very committing. Dunno about 3ps, it's grade is a long running argument un UK Climbing.

What is not acceptable for Tiger's Wall to be VS 5a is the gear situation. In general, VS 5a means one or two hard move but gear is bomber. This applies to Marcher Lord in Berryhill. The gear is really bomber from bottom to top AND there is one or two hard moves near the top. So VS 5a is correct grading according to the principle of British grading system.
For Tiger's Wall, the gear is not available until after the crux half way up the route. So the gear, overall is not good. This factor alone, in British system, should push the adjectival grade up, which reflects the seriousness of the route. Now half way up a route is 50%. The run-out on Satan's Slip is about 25m up a 40m pitch, which is more 50%. On 3 Peebles, it's about 50% up the route. Now you can make your mind up what grade Tiger's Wall should be.

I disagree entirely. VS 5a usually means the 5a crux is fall-offable, ie either well protected or low down. Tigers Wall the first 3/4 moves are the crux over a flat landing. The rest is a path, a bit steep in the middle, but a path. Woolmans wall is exactly the same (that flake would snap if you fell on it with a sling round it, it has no safe gear).

Tigers Wall HVS is arguable, E1 is a joke. Blimy, I thought Russet Groove at VD was bad.