ABS Nationals - Who’s Going To Vail
February 19th, 2008Filed in Comps
Photos by: Susanica Tam
This past weekend the Spot bouldering gym in conjunction with USA Climbing put on one of the best bouldering comps in recent history.
This event was the proving ground for who will be chosen to represent the USA at the upcoming Vail Teva Games World Cup.
Chris Sharma made his second American comp appearance in as many months, coming off his win at SCS Adult Nationals a few weeks ago in Salt Lake City. Sharma was the clear favorite at ABS Nat’s but World Cup fever has infected more than the usual crushers and he was up against a stacked field.
Canada sent powerhouse comp climber Sean McColl and Japan sent three of their strongest climbers to compete against the likes of Sharma, Rands, Robinson, Harrington and Puccio. These international competitors definitely showcased what the Americans will be up against at the Vail World Cup.
The Open Event
Qualifiers are rarely a historic event but this National qualifiers was something special. After the dust settled on the quali problems there were zero ties. That means that from a setting perspective every competitor was completely separated in only one round! This feat has never been achieved in the history of American National comps.
The quali problems were all very distinct and refreshingly different from each other. This tested the climbers overall skill set and dropped any competitor that didn’t have the whole package.
Kynan Waggoner, Chief Open Setter said that it was due to the experience of his crew. “Jamie [Emerson] has incredible finger strength, Matt [Segal] is very gymnastic with a lot of competitor experience and Scott [Mechler] has the ability to put up showy problems that get the job done and my technical style, we all came together to form like Voltron.”
Alex Puccio was overheard saying that these qualifiers were some of the hardest quali’s she’s ever had to do; harder even then previous finals problems.
Indeed, the setters didn’t coddle the climbers and made them work right out of the gate on problem #1 with only 7 out of the 80 climbers grabbing the finish jug.
After that the competitors were falling all over the place, especially on Women’s #4 which was only sent by Puccio and Men’s #3 which went unsent.
Prime-Time Finals
On finals night almost 800 spectators packed the Spot bouldering gym to its Fire Marshal limits, with
hundreds still left out in the Colorado cold.
After such a successful qualifiers the pressure was off the setters. They didn’t have to break any ties or worry about putting together a super final. What they did have to do was put on a good show for the huge crowd. Chief Waggoner told Routesetter.com that the only thing he wanted his crew to do was to get one person up every route.
That in it self is still a hard and very specific task. A task that didn’t quite materialize. On the Mens side all but the last problem, which clocked in around V12, was sent. The other problems were sent several times.
The Women’s problems were about the same with the slopers of problem #3, shutting down all attempts. Throughout finals it looked like problem #4 would not be sent until Alex Johnson brought the thunder.
But ironically Johnson’s lone send of #4 was not enough to take the win away from Puccio who got three holds further than Johnson on #3, which was worth more points.
This scoring idiosyncrasy was confusing to the crowd and to the visiting IFSC President Marco Scolaris. Scolaris was in town to take in the show prior to the Vail Wold Cup. We might just see a shake up as to how the scoring is managed in the future.
All in all this was arguably the best bouldering comp held on American soil and it will take a heroic effort on the part of the World Cup setters and climbers to top this event.
| Men
1. Paul Robinson |
Women
1. Alex Puccio |
Youth
But this event was not just a he-man show. Taking place during the same weekend on the same walls was the ABS Youth National. This portion of the comp was the culmination of a seasons worth of effort on the part of three hundred 9 - 18 year olds from around the country.
The six setters of the Youth crew had three days to set 28 national level problems for five different age categories. They also had to coordinate with the Open crew for the limited wall space that the Spot offered.
There was a lot of prior speculation as to how this space restriction would work out, but even though the Youth crew got much less sleep (three hours some nights) than the Open crew, they didn’t have a problem fitting in the requisite number of problems into the allotted space and time.
The relatively young Youth setting crew brought distinctly grown up problems to the kids. Several of the problems featured powerful moves that tested the new breed of young, burly climber. One problem even had a big (but kid-sized) jump-start and down campus sequence.
It should also be noted that at the end of finals there were no ties which meant no super final. And to a setter, that’s the mark of a successful event.
Forerunners
Not to be left out was the very import role of the forerunners during the setting of both the Open and Youth comps.
Holding a comp in Colorado certainly has it’s benefits and one is the large pool of super strong forerunners to chose from. V15 boulderer Ty Landman, indefatigable Spot setter Johny Hork and even old time setter Jimmy Redo came in to give the Open problems a run.
Vertical World Assistant Coach and competition climber Sidney McNair and coach & Spot head setter Justen Sjong helped the Youth setters perfect their problems.
Check out an awesome slide show of the comp from photographer Susanica Tam at Climbing.com. Coming soon, Susanica will have a time lapse slide show from two days of setting at ABS Nationals. Look for it soon!
February 19th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Sorry to have missed this. Looks as though it was a great comp.
Many of my shapes made their larger audience debut there and it would have been nice to see how they climbed and how they were received (not to mention what the setters did with them).
Given the number of high-caliber climbers that participated, now more than ever I look forward to the outcome of the World Cup. Could it be that the US competitive scene is finally coming of age?
Thanks for the comp report.
February 19th, 2008 at 8:23 pm
Hey sounds like it was an awesome comp!
I have a question, around what grade would the 17-18 year old guys be climbing in the youth devision?
February 19th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
If I remember correctly the A and Jr category guys qualifier started at V5/6 and their last problem in finals was around V9 (and nobody did it).
February 19th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
that slide show is one of the best things i have seen. she really filled that with the emotions i know i was feeling all weekend.
bravo
February 20th, 2008 at 9:27 am
Awesome, awesome comp for sure. We were also kind of confused by the scoring for open finals. Couple of questions:
1) I’m interested in hearing thoughts on the Male A/JR final #3 with the jump start. How did the setters feel when some of the kids didn’t seem tall enough to do the start? A few of the kids seemed to give up (probably too easily).
2) And while there were no youth superfinals it seemed like there was difficulty separating some of the younger categories during finals. It seemed liked problems 1 & 2 were pretty easy and the 3rd became abruptly difficult although a couple of the groups saw problem 3 be finished by several climbers as well. This probably has a lot to do with how difficult it is to set for smaller climbers but I thought it might be an interesting discussion.
February 20th, 2008 at 10:44 am
i would like to hear this as well.
?
i was in iso for most of the event, and when i came out to see the jump start, it didnt look like there was a problem. but i later heard that a couple kids couldnt reach the holds, therefor receiving 0 points for the problem.
was this an oversight, or was this done on purpose
February 20th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Hey all, these are great questions that I’m happy to answer.
C.N. I’ll hit your questions first:
Open Finals scoring: Each problem has a value of 1000 points (difficulty doesn’t factor in) divided by the # of scorable holds. So a shorter route will have a higher per hold value than a longer route. There is talk of modifying the scoring process for next year so keep an eye out for that.
1) MA/MJr final #3: We (the setting team) felt that a jump-start was fine for these categories, and fine for the order of the problem.
Why? Because we felt that jumping and dynoing are skills that ought to be tested along with clever footwork, strength and balance; things these categories had already seen in the comp. Also, durring forruning the move was easily done by folks as small as the smallest MYA, and so we left it in place.
Does it suck to see someone struggle with the first move off the ground? Absolutely. Yet I want to point out that those that didn’t do it, didn’t lack the ability to jump that high, but the skills to jump with precision and control.
2) For the D categories’ finals we definitely underestimated how they would perform on their 2nd final. We thought there would be 4 sends per group on this problem, and it turned out more like 7.
Why? I believe it has to do not with a lack of us understanding their size, but in how much the overall category has improved over the past year. The D group went from struggling on V3-V4 at last years National to a majority hiking those grades this year! (What are folks feeding these kids?!?) It is the first time I have ever seen an entire category improve so much…an eye opener for sure.
Tyson:
As stated above the jump-start was definitely intentional. My philosophy for comp setting is that the best climber is the strongest with the most rounded set of skills (eliminating reach issues depending on each category!), and so I want to test climbers in as many strength and skill sets as possible. In this particular case, based upon observations while they climbed, I feel it boils down to a lack of rounded skills, not reach.
February 20th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
I would say the jump start was “reachy” I’d say this because it was harder for some kids based directly on their height. My climber did not have to run and push off the first foothold, he simply hopped up from below the start in a much more controlled fashion than if he would have had to run, place his foot, and grab the start.
Otherwise…..an awesome set of problems!
February 20th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Hi all, I would like to just thank all the setters for doing such an amazing job on this comp. Molly you know whats up for sure!! The 3rd final was dope for real, I tend to hate jump starts but it was rad! Thank you!
Also, it’s kinda lame that every one makes such a big deal about the open comp and not the youth! there are photos and videos of the open quali’s and finals but never of youth. does any one have photos or video footage, maybe I can edit some thing decent…
February 20th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
Molly - Thanks for the responses. I agree that the young kids have definitely gotten stronger and it is always difficult to gauge.
I tend to agree with Rhoads on the jump start issue. Taller climbers simply jumped up to the start which didn’t really require any skill while shorter climbers were forced to run, jump and hope they could control the holds. I’d like to hear of any climbers that practice this because to me jump starting problems isn’t really much of a climbing skill. At least not one you would want to test on a national stage. I can’t think of hardly any such problems outdoors but I understand the need to mix things up I guess.
Problem 3 not withstanding the other problems looked to be top notch, and our kids had a blast climbing all weekend.
Kyle - It looked like Dave Hudson should have about 5,000 pictures from the youth comp, not sure if/where he would be posting those. I have some from Saturday but I’m not sure how they turned out.
February 20th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
The funny thing is, i actually did train for jump starts. I was always terrible at them. I set a few at my gym and set one for the last comp i set for. You will run into them outside, in gym and comps on national and international levels. I agree with molly that a better stronger isn’t always the strongest but the most rounded.
February 20th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
just razzin molly. i knew it was intentional and i knew it wasnt a reach issue. i just like hearing people complain about reach and you know i will be the first one to get people started on it. i hear it every day at our gym. my favorite is watching people call “reachy” and then i’ll send one of my kids over and have them crush the move. then it becomes a “well they are so light” problem. what is it, are you too short, or too fat?
its not reach, its ability. if there are reach issues in these comps, well…………….the setters really blew it, but in this event, that was not the case. i thought at first maybe the first moves of girls problem 4 in qualis was a bit reachy, but then i saw the heel hook beta and changed my opinion. a couple of my girls got blown off by that and i just felt that it was reach, but then i realized it was technique.
each problem this weekend was done by kids of all sizes. some easier than others, but that is the way it is.
nice work setters, you all did a great job and receive my thumbs up for what its worth.
February 21st, 2008 at 7:10 am
[…] Routesetter.com has a great recap of the entire ABS Nationals weekend from the routesetter’s perspective. I raised a question in the comments about one of the problems at the comp having a jump start that seemed to stymie the shorter climbers. Be sure to check it out for head youth setter Molly Beard’s response which I think makes sense even if I don’t really count jump starting as much of a climbing skill. I also think that climbingnarc.com needs some sweet shirts like Routesetter.com’s Mike Helt was wearing at Nationals this weekend… […]
February 21st, 2008 at 10:12 am
I remember a lot of jump starts in Font.
As a shorter climber I’ve always hated dynos, so I don’t practice them. I’ve just resigned myself to the fact that if there is a dyno problem, I’m not going to do it. However, I also don’t really compete. If you’re going to compete you better work on your weakness, short stuff.
February 21st, 2008 at 10:35 am
Hey all. I gotta say: damn this site is dope. Where else could we all discuss what it is that we do? I am diggin’ it.
Not to keep belaboring the point but I do want to address some of the comments made yesterday. Primarily Rhoads and C.N.’s about the usefulness of using jump-starts. You do find them outside, but more importantly, you WILL find them at adult open and international events. I have yet to see a US open national or international event that dosen’t include at least one jump-start; see the Men’s #1 from this year! For those youth with adult aspirations I think it is critical that we give them exposure to this skill.
I also went thru the results again this morning cause some of the posts got me wondering if I had missed something, as in: ‘did more kids fail on the jump than what I believed I had seen?’ The result, no. No Jrs and only the last 2 A’s failed to hit the jump.
Tyson? You, stiring up the pot?!? I am shocked. What have you done with him? Where is the REAL Tyson, you pod person? Give him back to us!
February 21st, 2008 at 10:41 am
It’s up.
http://www.momentumvm.com
February 21st, 2008 at 2:03 pm
Just cause it’s in other events doesn’t make it ok, that’s just jumping on the band wagon. Really, I don’t think it’s a big deal, one jump start on the final problem is fine, I just wouldn’t want to see every problem start that way. But, I think you are treading in dangerous waters trying to make jump starts that don’t discriminate. If they didn’t discriminate, even just a little, you probably wouldn’t hear people talking about it.
February 21st, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Men’s Final four was probably not V12, and in all honesty a low end V11. Just a tricky one. I can do nothing more as a setter then have a problem that is really doable, has almost been done, and have Chris Sharma ready to climb it. I was really psyched on the way everthing went. This was a great event for US comp climbing and I was glad to be apart of it.
February 22nd, 2008 at 5:30 am
[…] The ABS Nationals results are in with Paul Robinson taking the mens and Alex Puccio the womens. B3bouldering, Climbing.com, Routesetter.com, and ClimbingNarc have more details. […]
February 22nd, 2008 at 6:02 am
I’d like to weigh in on the fairness of the jump start at the Youth Nationals for the MA/MJr Route #3. With no disrespect for Molly, I though it was totally unfair! It was definitely unfair to ONE very talented climber, if not several. Molly is known for setting excellent routes for youth competitions, and I expect that to continue so no disrespect intended in anyway…. But, this one in particular was a total let down. Not because of the jump start itself, but because the routesetters obviously failed to take into account the range of heights and sizes for those who were to climb it. As far as I know, Lane was the ONLY ONE who was unable to jump up to get to the start hold (the MYA in last dropped out of the comp due to injury and didn’t even try route #3). Lane is one of the best climbers in his age category nationally, and he proved that by ranking 5th out of 32 in his MYA category after the four very difficult boulder qualifiers. In my opinion, he had a legitimate shot at making the top 4 finals spot earning a US Team position this year. But then came Route #3, totally out of his physical ability to jump that high. This route had two start holds, both more than 8.5 ft above the floor. The larger start hold had a screw-on piece that was pretty much required to be reached if you wanted any chance of controlling the start. There was a large foot hold to jump from I think about a foot off the ground. Lane is only 5’3” tall and Molly says that they had a forerunner and “several folks do the move easily”. Wow! I would like to see a list of those who are 5’2” or shorter who were able to successfully make that jump start so easily! And who was the forerunner was was 5’2” or shorter who did it so easily? I can’t imagine that statement is true by any stretch of the imagination! I don’t know who the forerunner was, but it must have been a very elite and talented professional who would have the ability to do that. Either that or a professional high jumper! Does anyone know who that forerunner was? For Lane to spend his allotted 5 minutes of climbing time futilely trying to get his jump to approach 4 feet above his head was so very disappointing. Can you imagine how he and those watching felt? Lane spent months and months of specific training for this event, with sights set high on gaining a US Team spot (top 4). Not to mention the airfare, hotel costs, etc associated with flying half way across America, missing school, etc only to be shut out by a route that he couldn’t even get a chance to begin on! So Lane got a big zero score on the last route which put him in last place for finals! He didn’t even get a remote shot at the top spots because of that huge start jump beyond his physical height! If a jump start is put there, I would expect that everyone in that category be able to jump off the foot hold and reach the start hold control points. Now if a novice climber doesn’t notice the huge foot hold to jump off of, then yes, that climber probably deserves to not get the start hold. But for Lane, that route was totally unfair! In fact, after 5 minutes of futility, one of the routesetters came over to offer some consolation, even telling him that he thought he was in a younger male category! How bad it that? I’m sure Lane appreciated the camaraderie of the routesetter, but it’s a little too late considering the circumstances of how they pretty much destroyed any chance he had of winning or taking a US Team position. Yes, Lane is small in size, but he is phenomenal climbing talent. Giving him a Nationals Finals route like this left many with a very bad taste in their soul! It was very disappointing to say the least. Yuk.
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:36 am
Well Climb OnSight, having not seen the problem I can’t say for sure, but going on your information it seems like this kid should have been able to reach it. You say the start holds were 8.5′+ off the ground, so I’ll assume 9′ or 108 inches. the kid is 63″ tall, so that leaves 45″ between his head and the start holds. Figure he has a 1.5′ reach above his head (which I think is conservative), and there are only 27″ between his reach and the start holds. 27″ is not all that far to jump, especially with a foothold. To me it sounds like if the kid is coordinated enough, he should be able to reach the holds without a problem.
February 22nd, 2008 at 7:45 am
Wow, Yo are you one of Lane’s parents or something? You know trying to live your life through your son’s? Geez, first where to you get off questioning the accuracy Molly’s statement? We did have a forerunner who was 5′2 AND she was a girl (sorry to throw that in there ladies! I’m an ass) Lane didn’t fail on the problem because he didn’t have the ability to reach the holds, he failed because he couldn’t hold on! If you can touch the hold you can control it… You’re acting like he was miles away from being able to grab the holds when in fact, he hit them several times. Yes, it did suck to be lane that day, but in noway was it the setters fault, the climb was completly doable for someone his height. And to comment on your comment about Lane’s ability to make a spot on the team… I’m not trying to put the kid down or nothing, but I just checked the scores on usaclimbing.net and there were 10 scores better than his on the 1st problem, and 8 scores better than his on the 2nd. I’m not sure where you say if he had been able to do well on the final problem he’d have made the US team… No matter what the out come of a competition someone is going to be complaining and running their mouths… Molly you did an absolutly AMAZING job!!
February 22nd, 2008 at 9:07 am
No, I’m not Lane’s parent. I’m just a fan of great climbing and great routes. I didn’t touch the start holds on route #3 so I can only speak to what I have heard. And yes, Lane was able to touch the bottom of the start hold. The problem was that there was a screw-on to the upper part of the start hold which was out of reach for him. That screw-on piece evidently was the critical part to be able to gain control of that hold. That, plus there was a 2nd start hold which was even farther beyond the first hold. I have no doubt that Lane could probably work on that route for some time and eventually get it. That’s not the point. Why was he forced to spend his limited time on the jump start when others could jump easily to the start within just one or two attempts? Lane was clearly the shortest and smallest of his category. As a result, most of the field of climbers had 4+ minutes to negotiate the route, whereas Lane never even got a chance to get on the route. Again, I think the jump start is great, but the setters have to realize who they are setting for and make sure no one gets singled out like happened this time.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:06 am
Anonymous, Jeremy, you just don’t get it, do you? It’s not that he was too short to reach the holds, it was that at his height it was HARDER for him than others to reach AND control the start. That is the definition of reachy. Lane, (whom I don’t know) seems to have been at a disadvantage because of only his height. I believe that was the point OnSight was making.
BTW, if you are working in an event at this level where the stakes are high (like a spot on the national team), be fully prepared to take some criticism. It is the nature of the beast. Just don’t take it personally.
February 22nd, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Ok this was a productive discussion but now we are all beating a dead horse.
Certain folks clearly aren’t gonna be brought around to mine (and others) logic and experience. That’s fine. I accepted long ago that it is impossible to make everyone happy in this line of work. But at least try to keep the snarky voices out?
People don’t take things personally until they start getting attacked, especially from folks who lash out from behind aliases. By attacked I mean specifically: implying someone is lying, or telling folks they ‘just don’t get it’; a less than clever way of trying to insult someone’s intelligence/grasp of a opposing argument.
This has gone beyond just ’stirring the pot’ and Routesetter.com deserves better.
February 23rd, 2008 at 2:09 pm
I didn’t think they actually understood what has been said. Sigh…..
Ask the short kids, it was unfair. Hell, ask the tall kids, they will probably tell you the same. My competitor agreed the start was reachy and he was easily able to grab the holds with out even running.
Die horse die!
February 23rd, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Yeah, the fat kid thought it was unfair, too.
February 24th, 2008 at 12:42 am
Wow, this has all gotten pretty personal…that being said Climb Onsite get over it. I don’t know you but you sound like one of those soccer moms that every one hates.
First of all, if lane was doin months of “specific training” it might have been smart to train “specificly” for more dynamic movements and jump starts…this was a bouldering comp right? I have absolutly no jumping abilty, I’m the kid who runs into walls trying to do a jump start problem…but instead of complaining I WORKED harder for it.
I’m sorry lane didn’t do well, but every competitor out there has been shut down on a move or problem. and complaining about it will never help…all you or any one can do is take your failures and apply them to doing better in future comps…so there for god sake the horse is dead!!
Molly, respect yo! Coming from a strait up vertically challenged white kid. I loved final #3 it was beautiful. see you at Jr route nationals i hope!
February 24th, 2008 at 9:25 am
My name is spelled wrong….
but forerunning was a blast, almost better than competing. I thought both events were great and the problems were rad!! Definitely surprised none of the girls made it past that sloper on Open Women’s 3 in finals. It seemed like no one was liking the slopers on finals 2 and 3 that night…
Hey Mike when do I get a Routesetter.com shirt?
February 24th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
So, I just need a straight answer, do you guys believe that the jump start, all other abilities equal, was NOT a disadvantage for a shorter climber?
February 24th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
yeah, it probably was a disadvantage for shorter climbers. but the point everyone is making is, not all moves are fair for everyone. sometimes its easier for tall people, sometimes for short. there are reachy moves everywhere - both on rock and in comps. in the end, the best climbers will be those who stop complaining about their disadvantages and instead work on improving on them. im sure there are plenty of people who are lanes height or shorter that would have been able to do the move.
the current world champion - ramon julian - is 5′2. But you dont hear him complaining about his height…
February 24th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
gabor is right,
a jump start leaves a shorter climber at a disadvantage. it is easier for a taller climber to reach a jump start than it is for a smaller climber to reach a jump start. saying that the move was just as easy for a smaller climber is ridiculous.
however, that is part of competition. being able to adapt to different situations and overcome obstacles that put you at a disadvantage.
im sure there were moves that were much easier for short people than for taller people as well. actually, i know there were.
it is time to move on from this topic. do not dwell on the fact that one move, on one problem, at one event, shut one climber down. it happens in every event. do not let this take away from the fact that the setters and the USAC threw an amazing event.
stick around awhile, you will find plenty of things to get upset about after every comp you go to. and then you will learn to let them go.
February 25th, 2008 at 12:26 am
hmmm.. guess my original comment was considered out of line. My point was (is)… nearly all physical sports favor certain physical traits. In basketball they don’t lower the rim to level the playing field for shorter players. Teams get taller players. Some shorter players may overcome their physical disadvantage by either learning to jump much higher, or excelling at other areas to benefit the team. With climbing teams though, the latter is out, as it really just comes down to one person vs the obstacles.
My mono pocket is these kids three finger rest jug. I’ll deal with it. I might cry.. but only to myself, and I won’t expect anybody to stop setting with mono’s. That’s just part of climbing. I certainly wish I had the strength to weight ratio advantage some of these “less than tall” kids have, but unfortunately, I’m kind of tall. I’m apparently at a physical disadvantage. Dang…
Now don’t get me wrong… as a professional setter with plenty of comp setting experience, I always take into account the climbers heights! Just as I need to know what level the top competitors are climbing at, I also need to know the height of the “least tall” persons. And I do everything I can to make every route accessible and equally as difficult for all of the competitors. It takes me a lot longer to set while making these considerations. And it removes many potential moves from my bag. But I’ll do it… that’s what I’m paid for.
My point is .. well .. scattered in the words above. In fact I think there’s a few of them up in there (not words, points). At any rate…
…as a setter, I’m sorry for any reachy moves I may have set, and I’ll continue to avoid them and never stop learning about setting better as long as I’m an active setter…..
…and as a climber, ShazBot, man-up or do a different route.
February 27th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Paige Claasen sure has gotten hella strong!!
March 28th, 2008 at 9:27 am
I thought the setters did a nice job at the junior event. The setting at nationals tends to be more technical and less powerful for the kids in general.
Yes, a jump start is easier for a tall versus a short kid. But, in the long run and on most problems, it is a far greater advantage to be short. I have seen way more problems that a shorter climber has the advantage. High foot chips when traversing is one of them. Shorter levers, hips closer to the wall, etc…
For the most part, look at all the kids that dominate the D, C, and B groups, they are all short. The difficult moves for a taller climber are harder for the novice see.