Why are hard bouldering traverse problems in europe not really regarded as true boulder problems? Have a look on 8a.nu - many traverse problems get post-scripted with a \"trav\" after the grade to indicate that it is a traverse problem. The sentiment seems to be \" Oh well congrats with sending your 8b+ boulder project, pity it's a traverse.\" There was an article on 8a.nu a while ago about this as well, but I couldn't find the link now. Anyone think we should follow the example?

Traverse problems are as much part of bouldering as one move dyno's & double dyno's. Where do you draw the line?

_________________
Inspiration exists, but it must find you working. – Pablo Picasso

Hey no I agree completely that traverses are boulder probs just like any other. Was just interesting to see this view on it that they apparently have in europe (or at least in parts of it)

The reason why boulder traverses are seen as a lessor achievement is because they are often linkups. The logic goes something like this. Assume you can do a 7A problem, then you add a 10 move 6C finish to it. Logically the linkup of the 7A and the 6C must be harder than the single 7A - so it must be 7A+ (but is it really any harder).

There was a good idea published on 8a a while back that said that we should grade climbs by their nature rather than if you use a rope or a pad. ie a 50 move boulder traverse is more likely to be a route in nature than a boulder problem. The same applies to routes with a single stopper move (which are more like boulder problems in nature, even if that move is 5 bolts up).

This is already happening to some extent. There was a huge roof problem opened in Rocklands last year that is graded 8a (route grade).

_________________
There's no point being pessimistic, because it probably won't work

Quick correction:
'Think of them' was actually graded Font 7c, Cedric did mention that it felt like a 8a route.
It is clearly a boulder though by the way you climb it... not a long traverse at the base of a crag, as are some of the super long 'boulders' in spain etc

I guess my point is slightly off topic - because traverses can be routes or boulder problems in nature. But I do like the idea of grading based on nature rather than whether you use a rope.

Simplistically - the idea is that the difficulty in climbing routes is to link the thing together, whereas the difficulty in climbing boulder problems is doing the moves (ie one doesn't get pumped). Obviously there is a huge grey area / overlap in between these 2 extremes.

Some examples of this are:

Wheel of Life in Oz is a 60 move 8C+ boulder problem - surely 9b is more relevant?

The Fly in USA is a 2 bolt 5.14d (9a) - but now most people refer to it as V13, regardless of whether they use a rope or not.

What about the Sex Traverse - I originally graded it 27, which seems to make more sense than 7A.

_________________
There's no point being pessimistic, because it probably won't work

Thanks Guy.
Slightly off-topic. What does the \"SD\" stand for in Michael Janata's De Pakhuis guide. I saw \"SD\" indicating the start of almost all the traverse problems I tried there last weekend.

_________________
Inspiration exists, but it must find you working. – Pablo Picasso

SD = sit down start 5(ie sit start)
SS = stand start