Routesetter.com Forum

The forum for all things routesetting

Register or log in - lost password?

Username
Password

Remember me

1. Joe Czerwinski
   Member

   Mike and tyson bear with me please:

   I would like some feedback on this from routesetters. In a flash format comp, is the "intended" sequence of a route the same as the scored sequence?

   Is the intended sequence IMPLIED as the scored sequence?

   When it comes to a a flash format comp, should the scored sequence differ from the intended sequence?

   IF the scored sequence differs from the intended sequence in flash format, should the forerunner climb it as intended or as scored?

   I know there are several factors that influence these opinions, but if the USAC is going to continue scoring in this fashion as compared the IFSC world cup difficulty scoring (+/- system), should we adopt that system as we have in accordance with trying to get into the olympics?

   Whatever it is, i feel the answer is consistency.

   Posted 10 months ago #

2. Herman
   Member

   The routesetter should build routes that are judge-able.

   So any inconsistencie between the scored sequence and the intended sequence should not be build at all.

   In the 15 years that i have been involved with the IFSC this has always been a very hot topic. Concensus seem to have been achevied by this document but a lot of judges interpret this in different ways. Also in a lot of countries this system is not followed (to the letter, or at all).

   http://www.ifsc-climbing.org/2011/Admin/Numbering%20handholds%202010.pdf

   My advice:
   Work out a way to score and build routes between routesetters and judges and stick to that.
   that will mean that some moves connot be build as they cannot be correctly/fairly scored.

   Posted 10 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.