do you guys have a strong preference either way on handhold styles? are you just more interested in comfort, durability, and general creativity when it comes to handholds? curious for some feedback.
rock realistic vs. clean shapes
(7 posts) (7 voices)-
Posted 11 months ago #
-
I go back and forth on that.
There are times when I wish I could have a realistic rock environment available on a regular basis (probably because I'm 3 hours away from actual rock) and then there are times when I embrace the gym climbing esthetic.
We have some of the Nicros holds that resemble real rock and I really like setting with them, but I think it would be rather boring if you couldn't have all the other incredible hold designs available today.
So my vote goes for both!
Posted 11 months ago # -
This is totaly classical vs. romantic
I like both for different reasons. From a more practical setting point of view I think that clean shapes, offer more options. Look at Teknik's shapes- they are versatile, comfortable and clean. They make shapes focus on the style of hold that it is intended to be. They could however be seen as more plain looking. With shapes that mimic real rock to literally, they can cross the line into gimmicky. Even though they may be more interesting the first time you encounter them. Things like hidden thumb catches or features of the hold you have to search for, are only new once. After that you'll know and grab it like any other hold. So...both are great and they should be mixed together.Posted 11 months ago # -
A mixture is definitely key.
That said, I much prefer simple shapes. We are training movement when we climb at the gym, and that movement is created whether or not the holds are ultra realistic. Ultra realistic tends to be limiting in it's use, and can border on tweaky.
Sometimes I look through various hold companies portfolios, and wonder, what the hell were they thinking? How many of those have the even sold, and who was the poor bastard that bought it?
Posted 11 months ago # -
I lean strongly towards creative shapes in the gym. I believe that gym climbing is best seen for what it is; a separate sport in the climbing world.
This was something I struggled with for the first half of my career as a setter...until I got hold of a SoIll catalog. I think they were one of the first companies that was truly doing some crazy shit! Every concept of attempting to recreate "real climbs" was ignored at best, or blatantly scoffed at worst. I can deal with the gimmicky telephones and lightbulbs for what they create. Those shapes allow other shapers to throw out old, tired concepts and try their own ideas of what they think gym climbing is all about. Some will go the direction of creating futuristic, oversized Christmas ornaments hanging from ceilings and double-dynos off florescent, blacklight lit, jugs. The majority of shapes will be the creative muse for setters and climbers to test new moves, develop technique, and build power.
I agree with the idea that the first generation of kids who grew up in climbing gyms are now the professionals running them. That, I think, is the driving force behind this debate.
Side note:
When I first started setting, I was making frequent trips to Smith Rocks in Oregon. I was the definition of "gym rat" at the time. In an attempt to show off my limited setting skills, and the fact that I had just climbed Chain Reaction (after 50+ attempts), I tried to duplicate the climb inside. It took me hours to create the most contrived 5.12 you will ever climb. That was the last time I attempted anything resembling a indoor recreation of real-rock.
Posted 11 months ago # -
early on i struggled the same way in trying to make outdoor climbs in the gym. while you can make pretty close analogues, generally it just doesnt really work. that is not to say that you cant have routes that feel like real rock climbs and make them fun. in my opinion it is important to maintain diversity in feel as far as holds and routes go. that being said, i almost never set routes with defined cruxes like you will encounter outside. there is a popular route at HCR called lavendar eye that rings in at 12a. it is essentially a 5.10 slab to a short v4 to 10- jug hauling. as far as routes in my gym go, you will never see that. we generally set progressively because when it comes down to it, indoor routes are for training. i know i digress a bit but i feel like the ideas are linked. mimic but dont copy. it generally never works out the way you want it to. that being said, diversity is key
Posted 11 months ago # -
I personally don't mind the "realistic" holds, as long as they are skin and tendon frendly. Call me crazy, but I still view gym climbing as training for the Real Thing. Nothing is quite as frustrating or embarrasing as not being able to work your project because you tweeked something at the gym, never mind getting a flapper from some sharp piece of plastic. I think most holds less like real rock because the shaper is thinking about skin and tendons.
Posted 11 months ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.