Setting and Revising the Record in Climbing

Grade debates are inherently pointless.

Arguments about whether something is 5.12d or 5.13a (or whatever) are as unproductive as debating what a specific color looks like. Yes, while each and every color contains an empirical, measurable reality, which is its wavelength, precisely how that wavelength is “seen” by your brain may be different from one brain to the next, especially depending on the number of hallucinogenic substances that you have ingested that day.

Perceptions of climbing difficulty are just as personal—hence, this phrase, often shouted at the end of the rope, or face-down on a crashpad:

“That move is HARD FOR ME!”


Yes, while each rock climb can be broken down into empirical measurements such as hold size, distance between each hold, and length of the route—the difficulty in moving between those points of rock is a completely subjective reality.

There’s no such thing as an objectively difficult rock climb. Rock climbs can only be difficult for you, and even that will change from day to day or year to year depending on your current waist size and shoulder mobility, to name two of the many variables that have conspired against my own climbing progression lately. Even your mood—that is to say, your motivation to climb—affects perceptions of difficulty. If you’re not psyched on climbing, better to go do something else because even the warm-up will feel like a project.


Still, there are moments in climbing when, perhaps, grades do matter. On a personal level, it’s fun to track our own progression up the YDS ladder. Reaching that next rung is immensely rewarding. The greatest feeling in the world.

Ironically, though, it’s also often true that as soon as we tick that hard climb, we’re also the first ones to recognize that that crazy thing that just happened to us, that once-in-awhile thing called sending a project, actually had nothing to do with just a number. It was about having an experience, perhaps a life-changing one.

Grades matter … and simultaneously they really don’t.

But what about when we talk about the grades at the very top of the scales—and the handful of elite climbers who are either pushing those grades, or repeating those grades to confirm their difficulties? Here, it seems, grades matter a bit more, if only because these ascents are what help our whole sport progress forward.

Top climbers also often rely on ratings to get the media attention that gets them the sponsorships deals that allows them to make livings. And today, that’s no longer just a matter of getting free shoes and a Friction Labs ambassadorship. We’re talking real money, baby.


My dawg D-Woods threw down the big V16 on The Process. But is it only V15? Or is it V17? What if it’s actually A5 5.13b? Maybe it should be given the UIAA rating of XXVI? Only time will tell! Photo David Clifford


When someone achieves a grade in climbing that gives that person the distinction of being the first—whether that’s the first ever, first female, first male, first Jamaican, youngest, oldest, whatever—that naturally bolsters the ascent’s significance, and elevates that climber’s prestige.

But one thing I’ve been wondering lately is, who is actually keeping track of these records? And what happens when the records retroactively change when a route is revealed to be either harder or easier than it was once thought?

The answer to the first question is actually easy: No one. No one is officially keeping track of the record. There is no Elizabeth Hawley of sport climbing and bouldering ( though perhaps Jens at is trying to be that guy). Who has done what, and What That Means, comprises a rather loose and fluid history. It begins with one climber’s subjective, potentially specious opinion about a rating, and is then crafted (increasingly) through press releases written by PR people who may or may not even be climbers themselves, then disseminated (and, perhaps, validated) by the unpaid interns working at climbing magazines and websites whose sole jobs are simply to get as many news stories online per day as possible because none of the actual editors can be bothered with that kind of savage workload.

The answer to the second question, however, is much more complicated, and worth a two-minute conversation, I hope. It’s a question that’s been on my mind recently after I broke the news for National Geographic’s audience that Ashima Shiraishi just became the first female to climb V15. This groundbreaking story came about a year after last year’s groundbreaking news, that Ashima had sent Open Your Mind Direct, which Ashima claimed as 5.15a, which would also make her the first female to climb that grade.


Ashima sent Horizon (V15+) this year. Photo: Brett Lowell / REEL ROCK
Ashima sent Open Your Mind Direct at Santa Linya in 2015. Question is: is it 5.14d or 5.15a, and does it matter?


There’s no question that Ashima sent Open Your Mind Direct last year in just a handful of extremely impressive tries while on spring break, and there’s no question that she quickly managed to take down Horizon last week, which Dai Koyamada described as the hardest boulder problem he’s ever done and originally rated V16 before demurring to V15+. There’s also no question that no matter what either this sport climb and this boulder problem are rated, Ashima’s achievements are nothing short of extraordinary climbing performances for the history books.

The question, though, is whether Ashima was actually the first female to achieve these grades, and whether they are as hard as they’ve been reported (by writers such as me, which is of course an irony that is not lost on your boy).

Who’s keeping track of this shit, and does it even matter?


Josune Bereziartu, for one, might think it does matter. This Basque climber, who retired from the sport due to shoulder injuries, was an absolute monster on the rock when she was in her prime in the late 1990s to mid-2000s. She is recognized as the first woman to climb 5.14b, 5.14c, 5.14d, and, arguably, 5.15a. I’ve also gotten messages that she also climbed a V15, too.

Josune climbed her first 5.14d, Bain de Sang, in 2002. Also that year, she climbed a boulder problem in the Baltzola cave called La Travesia de Arriota, which is given a “traverse rating,” whatever that means, of 8c, or V15.

In 2005, she climbed another 5.14d: Logical Progression, in Japan. Then she climbed Bimbaluna, in Switzerland (next to Bain de Sang), which is given the nebulous slash rating of 5.14d/15a (9a/9a+).


Ashima’s 5.15a, Open Your Mind Direct, was also at the time given the same 9a/9a+ slashy grade. However, due to a recently broken hold, some climbers in Santa Linya had been speculating that OYMD had graduated to a full-fledged five-fifteen-fuckin’-a-right. Which, of course, is where Ashima got the idea that OYMD is, in fact, 5.15a.

Tom Bolger
Tom Bolger climbing in his favorite cave, Santa Linya, where he’s ticked a number of 9a-and-harder routes.

Writing to me last year just after Ashima’s ascent, Ex-pat Brit-turned-Santa-Linya-uber-local Tom Bolger answered my question and clarified the grade confusion with OYMD:

“Yeah, Open Your Mind Direct is a funny one as the broken hold element has left the route without the long-move, good-hold-to-good-hold sequence, but it has left the more crimpy shorter-move sequence that people had previously used. So it’s very debatable whether the top is significantly harder, as some people preferred that crimpy, shorter-move sequence anyway. You know how it is, different styles and heights, people find what suits them. Interestingly the upper section, when Dani Andrada first did it, was way harder but another hold broke to leave a better hold behind.

Amazing effort from Ashima, truly incredible!!! If she is capable of doing hard 9a that quick, I’m sure she will go on to climb 9a+ with no problems! Personally, I thought Open Your Mind Direct was and is a hard 9a, but it is definitely easier than the other 9a+ routes that I have tried!”

Also, Daniel Woods recently climbed Open Your Mind Direct quickly, and confirmed that in his subjective opinion, the route is “only” 9a.


So, perhaps Ashima hasn’t climbed a true 9a+ … yet, because clearly she is more than capable of doing so. But perhaps she is the first American woman to climb 9a … which brings up another point about whether the record books should get changed, or not, when routes are downgraded.

Currently, Sasha Digiulian’s Wikipedia page lists her as the first North American woman to climb 9a, a distinction she earned when she climbed Jonathan Siegrist’s Pure Imagination in the Red River Gorge in 2011. Then, in 2012, she nabbed the first female ascent of Era Vella, a Chris Sharma 9a at Margalef.

Sasha Pure Imagination
Pure Imagination. Keith Ladzinski / 3 Strings Productions
Era Vella SD
Era Vella: 9a? 8c+ 8c? Who cares? Photo: Big Up Productions / REEL ROCK

Downgrades for both of those routes, however, have since been suggested by a number of folks. Pure Imagination has been onsighted twice. Most recently, it was redpointed by America’s awesome new sport-climbing champ, Margo Hayes, and Michaela Kirsch, both of whom took 8c+.

Era Vella was cast into the spotlight of online grade debates when J-Star climbed it third try, then wrote that there was no crux harder than V7, and stated that he can think number of 8c routes that are much harder than Era Vella.

Changing grades that change the record books don’t always work when something is downgraded. In 2008, Adam Ondra climbed the second ascent of Open Air at Schleier Wasserfall, Austria, more than a decade after Alex Huber’s first ascent. Back in 1995, Huber proposed 9a for Open Air, making it one of the earliest routes of that grade. Ondra, however, with nothing to prove, gave some serious props to the younger half of the Huberbaum by saying that Open Air was a full-fledged 9a+.

Unless Ondra is wrong about the grade—maybe he was having a “fat day”—this would retroactively make Alex Huber the first person in the world to climb 5.15—not this guy.


The other interesting point about Open Air that’s worth mentioning is that the route reportedly contains some rather flaky holds that have broken off over the years. So was the Open Air that Ondra climbed the exact same route that Alex Huber climbed? Maybe, but probably not.

I have to admit, there’s a part of me that’s nostalgic for that year, 2001, when Sharma climbed Realization and the whole climbing world stopped, put down the joint, turned down the dub reggae music, and went, “Whoa.” Would Sharma’s ascent have been as big of deal had Huber thrown down the 9a+ rating six years earlier? Maybe, maybe not. The climbing fan-boy in me doesn’t necessarily want to see those good memories retroactively taken away, but the climbing journalist part of me wonders how to write and re-write history, or whether any of this matters. Based on the number of annoying and irate letters I’ve gotten over the years clarifying something I’ve written—which go something like, “Megos was the first to onsight 9a, not Ondra, you fucking dumb idiot!” only usually much less nice—other people care about getting the record straight, too.

By the way, Megos is currently credited with the first 9a onsight for Estado Critico. However, after a broken hold began forcing people to climb up and around the original sequence, many climbers began to regard this new variation as 8c+, something Megos didn’t know necessarily when he walked up to the base, then walked up the climb. It’s possible, in fact, that Ondra was actually the first to onsight a real 9a, with Il Domani.

Ironically, there was a time when Chris Sharma never rated his routes. The Mandala, Realization, and many other climbs were simply left un-rated. Perhaps it’s an approach that’s worth revisiting as we on the sidelines continue to juggle other climbers’ grades around like hot potatoes. After all, a route can only be hard … for you. And for most of us, all of these routes are.

  • ch

    Siegrist sent Era Vella 3rd redpoint try, not 3rd go ground up; I can’t tell if my pedantry only proves your article’s point though. The thread on 8a about it is very long.

    Also, climbing grades could be considered intersubjective rather than subjective – relying on a consensus within a group (in the same way as the language to describe flavours, colours and sounds are) rather than subjective.

    • Jens Larssen

      I am glad you have started saying probably in regards who was the first because this is exactly how I have thought we should say. Grades are just (inter-)subjective and I think it is not correct to state as a fact, like you did before, that Sharma did the first 9a+. It just might have been Alex Huber.

      He has personally told me that the rumor you are spreading that a broken hold made it more difficult is dead wrong. So please correct your article or otherwise contact Huber yourself to get your facts straight.

  • Brad Hilbert

    In the spirit of this article-I would be interested in the thoughts of climbing dorks on how Beat Kammerlander’s ground up routes in the Ratikon measure up to the “Hardest Big Wall Climb In the World THE DAWN WALL?!!”

  • Ian cavanaugh

    Chris sharma was also not the first to climb 15a, that is a glory that is often never given to but well deserved by Fred Roughling. two of his routes that have yet to be repeated are proposed at 15a and 15b. just because a camera crew didnt record it for all of us doesnt mean he doesnt deserve credit.

    • Did Fred climb Akira before Huber did Open Air? I think they were the same year … Either way, Akira is probably more of a boulder problem with bolts in it than a route … not to mention all the chipped holds. Certainly hard either way. It’d be cool for someone to go repeat it and confirm

      • Yaploq

        The style of Akira (boulder/route) can be discussed but it has no chipped holds.

  • Jesse Bruni

    Loved this piece. I feel like whenever I try to bring up these types of discussions within my friends group it gets shut down incredibly quickly with some comment about how “all that stuff is super hard anyway and it doesn’t matter what the grade is”. As a climber, the grade is not a big deal, it’s about the experience, but as a fan/nerd of climbing, the grade is important and I want to discuss it. So lets just agree that it’s a silly discussion but we enjoy having it anyway, and lets have the damn discussion.

    Ben Moon now retroactively has the distinction of climbing the worlds first 9a as well, which considering the iconic nature of Wolfgang Gullich and Action Directe is an interesting little addendum to the climbing history books.

    • Right on, Jesse. What was Ben Moon’s 9a? I forgot about that …

      • Will Dixon

        Hubble. It was originally the first 8c+, now called a 9a. He talks about this some in theLedge podcast.

      • Paul


  • Zach LeDoux

    Great article! Yes, let’s complicate this even more with the addition of Fred Rouhling. Now the question is -“if it’s super hard AND chipped / manufactured, where does that ascent fit / compare”? BTW my favorite color is blue.

  • Guido

    Interesting. I would just throw my couple of cents by adding that the whole discussion is lacking unless you take into account how usa-centric rock climbing economy and media coverage have been in the last twenty years or so – maybe more. Europe is full of incredibile adventures and accomplishments that have often been barely noticed – if at all.
    It’s all rather recurring, if you think of it, but interesting nonetheless.

    • mike

      Maybe USA-centric if you focus on what is reported in American climbing magazines . . . but even then, I think they end up with a large focus on non-Americans climbing!

      I also think outside of bouldering (and even then it’s a maybe), the U.S. has generally been behind Europe with the standard of climbing – y’know, like how the U.S. has maybe 3 5.15s, and every house in Spain has a 5.15 in their yard (or so I’m told). In addition, with the rise of internet media and the speed in which ascents get reported, it feels like whenever anything of (mild or major) significance get sent, it’s reported.

      Andrew, do you take most people’s ascents at face value and trust the climbers’ did what they claimed? One of the reasons Akira and Chilam-Bilam don’t hit on the radar for most people as the first routes of their grade is the obscurity of the F.A. On the other end of the spectrum, I can think of some people’s score that are likely padded with softer-than-soft ticks and, in some cases, made-up ticks. Maybe one day we hit the point where you have to send uncut footage to the official Chamber of Climbing Records?

  • climbingterms

    Debate/Jens: We must also account for proximity to the Ego Singularity known as Boulder, Colorado, and its sister city West Boulder aka Rifle Canyon, which, much like black hole in deepest space, automatically inhales and macerates matter by way of one or two subtracted letter or V grades ensure best and most elite, cutting-edge parking for forearm-training facilities of Valmont Canyon. Yes?

  • Cool, thanks, that’s good info

  • steve

    Good article raising some interesting points.

    Here in the UK there is a strange trend in grading. Everytime a new guidebook comes out far more routes get upgraded than downgraded. Over time this results in the entire grading system gradually shifting upwards. Working out who did the first of each grade is becoming meaningless as the grades don’t stay the same.

    The French apparently take the opposite approach. The grades in Buoux are the same as they were 30 years ago. But these grades are then inconsistent with crags developed more recently with softer grades.

  • Eirik Fernandez Cuesta

    Nice article. Another climb that might be relevant to the whole first 9a+ discussion is Bernabe Fernandez’s Orujo which was suggested as 9a+ after he removed three out of the four artificial holds on the “original” line and reclimbed it back in 1998. I think that was the first ever 9a+ suggestion (seeing as how Akira was suggested as 9b).

  • Rick Deris

    What if C-A-T really spelled “dog”?

  • Trpolhill

    I don’t think climbing grades should change unless the rock itself is changed by some force of nature, lightning or an earth quake etc.. If a problem that Fred Nicole put up 20 years ago has been a V13 for all this time, to me, it is almost insulting or disrespectful to say that now it is a V12, if the rock didn’t change, how can the grade that no one has questioned for 20 years. Just because climbers might be better doesn’t mean the climb got easier. You want to change the scale, then add V17, downgrading seems pointless. Not to mention, as you did above, the only people downgrading climbs are men, and the downgrades you referred to were climbed by Ashima and Sasha. Anybody else think this is no coincidence? There is a macho factor involved in that some of the male climbers are threatened by the young women who are very strong climbers. I’m not trying to start any shit, I just think it is a little ridiculous. Also, Ashima went on to climb Ciudad de Dios, I think a few days after OYMD, and Ciudad de Dios is a 5.15a. Peace