Alex Puccio – Trice V12 from Brian Solano on Vimeo.

Back in 2002, I had a business trip to Silicon Valley and took a long weekend to head to Yosemite for some bouldering. There was only a smallish guidebook to the Valley bouldering at the time, but it was enough to get around and for me to sample the bouldering.

Since it was the middle of July, I was wise enough to head up to Tuolumne Meadows and avoid the 100+ degree temperatures and hordes of tourists. Unfortunately, there was no guidebook, but several climbers gave me rough direction to The Knobs.

As I was trying to figure out the correct parking pulloff, I saw what appeared to be an obvious looking climber. I pulled over, asked for directions, and was given tons of enthusiastic beta for the area. As I parked and gathered my gear, I kept thinking that guy looked really familiar. Then it hit me. It was Ron Kauk. He and Sterling Johnson were filming for their newest climbing video at the time.

In what was a completely random event, I and a few other climbers had the great pleasure of spending the afternoon bouldering with Ron and watching him climb some Tuolumne boulders as part of their filming. The combination of the beautiful scenery and spending the afternoon with a climbing legend will always hold a special place in my climbing memories.

So when Chris McNamara of SuperTopo asked me if I was interested in reviewing their new Tuolumne Bouldering guidebook, I excitedly accepted the offer.

If you’re familiar with other guidebooks from SuperTopo, then you’ll know what to expect as this guide follows their tried and true format. If you’re new to any of their guides, then you’re in for a great surprise.

This is the first edition of the guide, just released this July 2009. What I love about SuperTopo’s business model is when you buy the ebook, you receive three years worth of updates.

With tons of full color pictures, the Tuolumne Bouldering guidebook by Chris Summit is an excellent resource for over 20 Tuolumne bouldering areas. This thin book is only 72 pages in length but covers everything you need for each area including:

• number of problems
• best time of day
• difficulty range
• driving directions
• the approach

I particularly liked the blend of problem guide pictures with climber action shots of many areas. I believe the trend toward full color guidebooks is excellent as it can solve the old problem of not being able to see the routes on black and white images (anyone remember the old Seneca Rocks, WV guidebook?). The photos of problems in Tuolumne Bouldering use a picture of the boulder (with no climber) superimposed with a red line outlined by white and a problem number corresponding to the text. Very visible and easy to follow.

The guide’s introduction also includes everything you need to plan a trip to Tuolumne Meadows especially the all-important weather and lodging information.

For each bouldering area, Chris Summit (yes, he says that’s his real name!) provides an overview plus some historical context where applicable. There’s also two mini articles by John Bachar and Ron Kauk.

I was also pleased to see a star rating for each bouldering problem. I’ve been seeing too many guidebooks moving away from this and it really disappoints me. I understand that placing a quality rating on a climb or boulder problem is subjective, but regardless it gives the reader a baseline to see what stands out above the rest. Chris uses a star rating of one to four where every problem gets at least one star. I would have liked to have seen what this meant. Is one star worthwhile or just so-so? A legend/guide to the star rating system would have been useful.

But looking at the star rating system leads me to a question. Are there problems with zero stars and if so, were they not included in the book? The back of the guide says it includes the best boulder problems in Tuolumne so I’m assuming the crummy ones were left out. This can be good and bad.

I’d say that while Tuolumne Bouldering covers over 275 boulder problems, I’m always a bit wary of “best of” or “highlights of” guidebooks for an area. Mainly becuase I end up needing to warm up on a bunch of problems and they occasionally are less than stellar. Are these then not included? I’m usually more inclined to see everything and then make my own decisions about what to avoid based on star ratings. My apprehension was completely appeased though with an appendix in the back of the book that lists other areas worth exploring and possibly not completely developed yet. The obvious advantages to a best of guide are the smaller size and a conciseness that allows you to focus on hitting the best problems.

If you’re interested in checking out the format of the guidebook, SuperTopo offers a free PDF chapter for the Tamarack Boulders.

Overall, this guidebook is a must have for any climber planning to visit the area and do some bouldering in Tuolumne Meadows. I wish this was available for my first trip years ago. Even if you only have eyes for the classic routes, take an afternoon to sample the bouldering and I can guarantee you will not be disappointed.

Son: “Look dad! Look at the rock climbers!”
Dad: “Yeah, son — they’re practicing their rock climbing.” (No, sir! This is rock climbing… my goal is not to get strong for aid climbing.

The Things Tourists Say

The most recent climbing video is Daniel Woods on Wet Dream and Abaddon in Red Rocks, Nevada filmed by Carlo Traversi.

The last two added were James Litz on the first ascent of Masterpiece (V13) in Joe’s Valley, Utah and the second ascent of Psychedelic (5.14d) in St. George, UT.

The videos aren’t embeddable, so head to the Dead Point Magazine web site to check them out.

Well, it turns out one of the side benefits of her being born 10 days early was my ability to attend the premier of Rocky Mountain Highball last night at the Boulder Theater.

Overall, I found this to be an excellent climbing movie and I really only found a few minor flaws. The following are my impressions of Rocky Mountain Highball.

Before the show, the filmmakers mentioned that it took them over two years to make. That care and dedication for delivering this product was unmistakable throughout.

The title may lead the viewer to think this is just for Colorado boulderers. Rocky Mountain Highball was set in Colorado, but not specifically about Colorado. This is an important distinction. The film was more about the essence of bouldering and how highballs fit into the equation. How we as boulderers attempt to push our limits within the pursuit of bouldering. Rocky Mountain Highball appeals to all climbers regardless of style or geographic preferences.

That said, it depicted a nice overview of Colorado bouldering, really showing the breadth of rock type and quality here.

Rocky Mountain Highball had a great story line. Simply having a story, let alone an interesting one, is a major accomplishment for any climbing film. They started with examining the past, looking at the history of bouldering (not just highballs) and then progressed from the present to the future of highball bouldering.

The movie balanced between amazing footage of highball bouldering problems and short clips of commentary from boulderers both old and new.

The interviews with John Sherman, Pat Ament and John Gill were fantastic and likely worth the price of admission by themselves. Their insights and commentary on bouldering contrasted with the newer generation of climbers was striking.

During Rocky Mountain Highball I didn’t think much about the music until I started thinking about what I would say about the music! So I’ll take that to mean the score was unobtrusive and fit well with the climbing.

An often discussed topic, Rocky Mountain Highball took great care to dive into what highballs actually are and how climbers define them. Jason Kehl had one of my favorite quotes where he defined highball bouldering as when you personally feel like you’re too high off the ground (paraphrased). A highball for one person may not be highball for others. That’s really the essence of the experience, right?

It was also nice to watch a climbing film that wasn’t exclusively focused on the hardest boulder problems in the world. There were numerous problems shown that mere mortals could aspire to climb. Unfortunately, they were still scary and tall as hell.

There was also an all-star cast. From their web site:

Director/Filmmaker Scott Neel, and Yama Studio have brought in a huge cast of world renowned climbers, like Paul Robinson, Mark Wilford, Kevin Jorgeson, Lynn Hill, Daniel Woods, John Sherman, John Gill, Steve Mammen, and Jason Kehl. Having filmed more than 70 climbs with more than 35 athletes, this film proves to be an exciting journey through the world of highball bouldering.

Now for a couple negatives.

The film only showed names of climbers during their interviews, not during actual climbs. More frustrating though was the film only displayed the names of individual problems, but not the areas where they were located. As a new local to Colorado, there were many problems where I could place the area or specific boulder, but many I had no idea where they were located.

I spoke with @boulderdiaries after the show and he hinted at researching and publishing a list of the problems and their locations from the film. Or at least that was what I think I heard…

The only reason I can think of why they didn’t explicitly add the areas to the titles was the fact I mentioned above about Rocky Mountain Highball not really being a film about Colorado. Maybe by not highlighting the areas, the filmmakers were attempting to focus on highballing itself. Possibly true to their vision of the movie, but annoying nonetheless.

I know this sounds a bit of schadenfreude, but I think some more footage of failures or falling during some of the problems would have added to the movie. I say this because some of the more dramatic scenes were when a climber topped out of a highball. Watching well-known, pro climbers literally shaking from the fear and anxiety of doing the highball really made the viewer relate in ways you don’t normally see in a climbing film. Especially noticeable was hearing Lynn Hill stress out near the top of one problem. You immediately start to think “if Lynn Hill is freaking out a bit on this highball, how really scary is this?”

Overall, Rocky Mountain Highball delivers on its promise of exploring the world of highball bouldering and more interestingly why climbers push themselves on these types of problems.

My Dad is in town this week and I took him with me to see the premier. As this was a much more climber oriented film compared to the recent releases of The Sharp End and Pure and since he isn’t a climber, I wasn’t sure he would enjoy it. Afterward, he said he loved it. That in itself should say a lot about the quality of the film. Creating a work that is climber-focused yet still delivers an impressive and powerful story line is quite an achievement.

The filmmakers, Yama Studio, have now updated the web site for Rocky Mountain Highball. The new site has the trailer available for download as well as cast and crew details.

ClimbingNarc has also posted some detailed thoughts on the movie.

(via straight outta bedlam)

UPDATE: All Climbing now has a review of Rocky Mountain Highball.

(via Bishop Bouldering Blog, Kelly McBride, and TheLowDown)

The Buttermilks from Jon Glassberg on Vimeo.

photo credit: ~ Phil Moore

UKClimbing.com offers up a comprehensive guide to bouldering at Fontainebleau, France complete with how to train, the local rating system, when to go, and where to stay.

It has been used as a bouldering area since the 1870s and has almost continuously remained at the centre of the world bouldering scene since the 1930s. Possibly as it is quite unique for one area to exhibit so many desirable characteristics: a large number of classic problems at all grades – including classic moderates, largely excellent soft and sandy landings, a positive and active local scene, historical interest (possibly the first or at least very early ascents of the first 4, 5, 6 and 7s in the world,) a strange and surreally beautiful locale, much potential for development and finally, the subtle nature of the problems, requiring footwork, body position and general trickery, often making success as much a mental as a physical workout and as a result it is supremely satisfying.

Another excellent resource for bouldering in Fontainebleau is Bleau.info

Another reason why I like the zone is because it rewards smarter climbers rathan than always the strongest. I’ve seen very strong competitors make mistakes during qualifyers and semis and as a result, they did not make finals. To me, thats the life of a competition.

In my recent post about ABS Nationals, I discussed the zone scoring system and how I found it somewhat unusual especially on the problem I was judging. Sean’s post really goes into a lot of detail on the zone scoring system and it makes a little more sense to me now.

Well, I was quite wrong in that regard. Chuck Fryberger’s Pure takes the genre to a new level. Pure was one of the more unique climbing films I’ve seen. This may be good or bad depending on your preferences. Let me explain a bit further.

From the opening, the viewer is struck by the beautiful cinematography of the film. Strong climbers and spectacular climbing areas are combined with an outstanding soundtrack for maximum impact. To be honest, I think the music in many climbing films is a liability, but in Pure I felt it added tremendously to the experience.

The overarching vision of Pure was to look at strong boulderers at areas across the globe while experiencing their approach to bouldering and its “purity”. In this regard, the film succeeded.

However, if you’re a fan of watching extended, intricate, and detailed climbing sequences of an entire problem, you may disappointed with Pure. Chuck forsakes showing the complete sends of many problems for the overall artistry of the film. The viewer will often only see the crux of the problem or a particularly exciting sequence of moves. You’re not going to watch many boring top-outs in Pure. Actually, one of the few top-outs shown in the film was quite interesting as some of the boulders in Innsbruck were snow covered for the sends.

Much of the bouldering footage was done in what I could best describe as stop motion. I was not the complete, flowing movement you’re used to seeing in other climbing films. Instead of showing entire sequences, Pure was more action oriented, skipping to the best moves in the problem. I found this exciting to watch, though I suspect there will be some viewers who will not like this approach.

Some of the featured climbers in Pure included Nalle Hukkataival, Kevin Jorgeson, Cody Roth, Kilian Fischhuber, Anna Stoehr, and Fred Nicole. They were shown bouldering at Rocklands, South Africa; Sonoma County, California; Fountainebleu, France; Innsbruck, Austria; Vail, Colorado; Arco, Italy; and The Vallei, Magic Wood, and Brione, Switzerland.

I had the impression watching Pure that there was a heavy dose of Nalle Hukkataival. This was not necessarily a negative though, because Nalle was extremely impressive to watch as he crushed problems. But it did seem there was a disproportionate amount of him in Pure.

The opening footage of the Rocklands was spectacular even though we’ve all seen video from there before. Kevin Jorgeson bouldering along the coastline in Somona, California was unique as it’s not quite well known for its bouldering. But as Kevin said in the film: what it lacks for in quantity, it makes up for in the quality of the lines.

I did think there was going to be more footage in Colorado. Now that I’m a resident, I can’t help but be interested in seeing more of my local areas. Colorado is listed on the film’s web site, but the only Colorado climbing in Pure was of the Teva Mountain Games in Vail.

This leads me to my only other minor complaint. I found it unusual to see footage of climbing competitions in Pure (Vail and Arco). I’m not necessarily against this, but it seemed a little out of place with the rest of the film. If taken in the context of following Nalle Hukkataival around the world bouldering, it makes more sense; but I don’t think this was a documentary of Nalle. Don’t get me wrong, the footage of these comps was great, but it just didn’t seem to fit in as seamlessly as everything else.

I also took a brief survey of some of my various climber friends in attendance and the response was very positive. The only negatives brought up were the ones I’ve mentioned above and are really minor depending on your pre-conceived notions of climbing films.

Overall, I really enjoyed Pure. It’s not a movie you’re going to watch to acquire exact beta for a problem, but the film takes you to these climbing areas and immerses you in the action. Pure will get you psyched to climb and in my opinion that’s the purest test of great climbing flick.

A few other notes from the Pure premier:

• A trailer was shown for Rocky Mountain Highball. One word – awesome! The premier of this film is in Boulder on April 27, 2009. This is also the due date of my first child. My wife was not pleased when I said I hoped the baby comes late so I could go to the premier…
• Mike Brooks of FrontRangeBouldering.com interviewed me briefly before the show. It was loud and I was drinking beer so I cannot be held accountable for anything stupid I may have said.
• For his train of thought impressions of the film, Boulder Diaries took live notes during the premier.
• Some complained on Chuck’s site about the computerized narrated voice in the trailer. It didn’t bother me at all, but it is still used to transition between the high level sections of the climbing areas in the movie.

The full set of pictures is on Flickr.

I mainly wanted to volunteer for two reasons. First, I wanted meet more local climbers. Second, I was interested in seeing some of the inner workings of a national climbing competition. With respect to those two goals, I definitely had a successful day. The drawback to volunteering is a shift took up a good chunk of time. My shift started at 9:45 am and ended at 3:30 pm. So a shift was almost six hours, not including the hour long orientation meeting the night before.

So what did I get for my seven hours of work? I met lots of climbers. I received a free t-shirt and lunch. I had a front row view of the competition while working. If you worked three shifts you got a free ticket to the finals, but working another 12+ hours for a $20 ticket made no sense to me whatsoever. The USA Climbing organizers likely need to work on sweetening the pot if they want more people to volunteer (especially since they’re not all volunteering themselves, right?)

The following are a few of my observations from judging the first men’s open qualifier problem.

I appreciated the fact that each problem used the holds from a specific company and there were some appropriate banners on/near that problem for the company. I’m hoping The Spot will be keeping some of the sick looking So iLL holds I saw on one of the women’s open problems!

The bonus hold scoring is unusual. On each problem there was a start hold, a bonus hold, and a finish hold. Points were only awarded based on controlling the bonus hold and the finish holds. Essentially a climber received the highest number of points for reaching the finish (and the bonus) holds in the fewest attempts possible. So if a competitor fell right before the bonus hold, they would receive no points at all during their attempts. On the problem I judged, the vast majority of those who obtained the bonus holds also went on to finish the problem. The real crux of the problem appeared to be much lower and many who attempted it received zero points for their efforts. While I was told by the organizers that the comp uses this format because that’s what they use in Europe, I found it to be a less than desirable way to accurately compare the efforts of the various competitors.

No previous climbing experience was required for the volunteer judges. I found this disturbing to say the least. We had at least one judge who was not a climber. Unfortunately, the idea of “controlling a hold”, despite the specific guidelines in their rule-book, is very much a subjective concept. It’s definitely a more understandable concept if you’re an avid climber. I understand they need volunteers, but I would have hoped for some vetting of the candidates beforehand. Or at the very least, moving volunteers around to appropriate positions based on their experience.

It was interesting to see the variation in mindset before climbing between each competitor. For example, while waiting for his first problem, Daniel Woods was chatting with other climbers seated near him and generally looked quite calm. Paul Robinson on the other hand appeared to be focused and quite in the zone while waiting his attempt. As soon as it was their turn to compete though, each was equally focused and up to the task of crushing the problem in front of them.

The full set of pictures I took are up on Flickr (beware, they’re unedited and taken with a point and shoot camera).

While I volunteered one shift at the ABS Nationals this weekend at The Spot, I wasn’t able to attend the finals. Ryan of BoulderDiaries and the ClimbingNarc though both have posted updates.

Men’s Results

1. Daniel Woods
2. Paul Robinson
3. Sean McColl

Women’s Results

1. Alex Johnson
2. Chauncenia Cox
3. Alex Puccio

The entire finals results are posted on the ABS Nationals site here: Men’s (PDF) and Women’s (PDF).

I also have an upcoming post of my behind the scenes impressions of the comp.

Footage in this 12 minute video includes Brian Hedrick on Mandala (V12), Daniel Woods on Secrets of the Beehive (V5R), Giovanni “G” Traversi on Haroun and the Sea of Stories (V12), Daniel Woods on Xavier’s Roof (V12), Ian Brown on Stained Glass (V10), and Flight of the Bumblebee (V7R).

Featured climbers include Nalle Hukkataival, Kevin Jorgeson, Kilian Fischhuber, Anna Stoehr, Fred Nicole, and Cody Roth.

First off, Morrison is the kind of bouldering area where you will definitely need beta from the locals. I had a really hard time deciphering problems using the guidebooks (Colorado Bouldering and Bouldering Colorado).

As a frequently climbed area outside of Denver, the problems at Morrison appeared to be beta intensive as there were many variations and eliminates.

One of the more interesting problems I tried wasn’t even in the guidebooks. A local boulderer gave me beta on a problem they call the “Grand Traverse”. Basically you start as far right of the cliff line as possible (just below the Black Hole) and traverse left as far as possible. Not sure what grade this comes in at because of the many variations you could use to complete the traverse, but it’s a great workout nonetheless.

The problems in The Black Hole appeared to be the best quality with the most interesting moves. There were a few problems that I didn’t get to try that I look forward to working on next time I visit.

Additionally, there are intriguing boulders on the south side of the road that yield some good problems according to the guides.

Overall, I wasn’t too thrilled with the place. In addition to the beta issues, problems were on the polished side. Obviously, this is understandable due to the high traffic the place receives. I was there on a cold early afternoon day, mid-week and there were a bunch of climbers there. I can’t imagine what Morrison is like after work during the summer. I also prefer actual boulders with normal top outs and you don’t really have this at Morrison as it’s more of a short cliff line.

If anyone is familiar with Morrison bouldering and thinks I’ve misjudged the area, please let me know what I missed!

While it’s always to great to hear about strong sends from young(er) climbers, I’m always most impressed with news from climbers past the age of 40. I suppose it’s because as I get older I gain more inspiration knowing it’s still possible to climb harder!

(via B3bouldering.com, ClimbingNarc, Andy Mann)