Grade (climbing)


In rock climbing, mountaineering, and other climbing disciplines, climbers give a grade to a climbing route or boulder problem, intended to describe concisely the difficulty and danger of climbing it. Different types of climbing each have their own grading systems, and many nationalities developed their own, distinctive grading systems.
There are a number of factors that contribute to the difficulty of a climb, including the technical difficulty of the moves, the strength, stamina and level of commitment required, and the difficulty of protecting the climber. Different grading systems consider these factors in different ways, so no two grading systems have an exact one-to-one correspondence.
Climbing grades are inherently subjective. They may be the opinion of one or a few climbers, often the first ascensionist or the author of a guidebook. A grade for an individual route also may be a consensus reached by many climbers who have climbed the route. While grades are usually applied fairly consistently across a climbing area, there are often perceived differences between grading at different climbing areas. Because of these variables, a given climber might find a route to be either easier or more difficult than expected for the grade applied.

History

In 1894, the Austrian mountaineer Fritz Benesch introduced the first known grading system for rock climbing. The Benesch scale had seven levels of difficulty, with level VII the easiest and level I the most difficult. Soon more difficult climbs were made, which originally were graded level 0 and 00. In 1923, the German mountaineer Willo Welzenbach compressed the scale and turned the order around, so that level 00 became level IV–V. This "Welzenbach scale" was adopted in 1935 by French mountaineers like Lucien Devies, Pierre Allain and Armand Charlet for routes in the Western Alps and finally in 1947 in Chamonix by the Union Internationale des Associations d'Alpinisme. It prevailed internationally and was renamed in 1968 as the UIAA scale. Originally a 6-grade scale, it has been officially open-ended since 1979.

Free climbing

For free climbing, there are many different grading systems varying according to country. They include:

Yosemite Decimal System

The Yosemite Decimal System of grading routes was initially developed as the Sierra Club grading system in the 1930s to rate hikes and climbs in the Sierra Nevada range. The rock climbing portion was developed at Tahquitz Rock in southern California by members of the Rock Climbing Section of the Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club in the 1950s. It quickly spread to Canada and the rest of the Americas.
Originally a single-part classification system, grade and protection rating categories were added later. The new classifications do not apply to every climb and usage varies widely.
When a route also involves aid climbing, its unique aid designation can be appended to the YDS free climbing rating. For example, the North America Wall on El Capitan would be classed "VI, 5.8, A5", or Medlicott Dome – Bachar/Yerian 5.11c

Technical difficulty

The system consists of five classes indicating the technical difficulty of the hardest section. Class 1 is the easiest and consists of walking on even terrain. Class 5 is climbing on vertical or near-vertical rock, and requires skill and a rope to proceed safely. Un-roped falls would result in severe injury or death. Originally, Class 6 was used to grade aid climbing. However, the separate A rating system became popular instead.
The original intention was that the classes would be subdivided decimally, so that a route graded 4.5 would be a scramble halfway between 4 and 5, and 5.9 would be the hardest rock climb. Increased standards and improved equipment meant that climbs graded 5.9 in the 1960s are now only of moderate difficulty. Rather than regrade all climbs each time standards improve, additional grades were added at the top—originally only 5.10, but it soon became apparent that an open-ended system was needed, and further grades of 5.11, 5.12, etc. were added, and thus the system is no longer decimal.
While the top grade was 5.10, a large range of climbs in this grade was completed, and climbers realized a subdivision of the upper grades was required. Letter grades were added for climbs at 5.10 and above by adding a letter "a", "b", "c", or "d".
The system originally considered only the technical difficulty of the hardest move on a route. For example, a route of mainly 5.7 moves but with one 5.11b move would be graded 5.11b and a climb that consisted of 5.11b moves all along its route would also be 5.11b. Modern application of climbing grades, especially on climbs at the upper end of the scale, also consider how sustained or strenuous a climb is, in addition to the difficulty of the single hardest move.

Length of route

The YDS system involves an optional Roman numeral grade that indicates the length and seriousness of the route. The Grade is more relevant to mountaineering and big wall climbing, and usually not stated when talking about short rock climbs. The grades range from grade I to VI spanning a one-hour climb to a multi-day climb respectively.
I–II: 1 or 2 pitches near the car, but may need to be avoided during avalanche season.
III: Requires most of a day perhaps including the approach, which may require winter travel skills. The East Buttress route on Mt. Whitney is a grade III, yet it requires 1,000 feet of technical climbing and a total gain of over 6,000 vertical feet from trail head to summit. Only a minority of climbers, the most fit and seasoned, could do this route car to car in a day. Other grade III climbs, such as Cathedral Peak in Tuolumne, are typically done in one day.
IV: A multipitch route at higher altitude or remote location, which may involve multi-hour approaches in serious alpine terrain. A predawn start is usually indicated, and unforeseen delays can lead to unplanned bivouacs high on the route.
V: A multi-day climbing adventure for all but an elite few. The route Dark Star, on Temple Crag, is grade V and involves a seven-mile approach and over 2,200 feet, 30 pitches of technical climbing.
VI: A multi-day climbing adventure for all. Peter Croft saves this grade for the full Palisade Traverse, a massive route which includes six 14,000-foot summits and miles of technical climbing. He states, "This is the only route in this book that I haven't completed in a single push, although I've done all the crux sections at various times." Although most grade VIs are alpine climbs, The Nose on El Capitan is an example of a technical grade VI route. It has 2,900 feet of either very hard technical climbing or easier aid climbing and takes most climbers 2–7 days, although a few climbers have freed it in a day, and more have aided it in a day.
VII: Under discussion.

Protection rating

An optional protection rating indicates the spacing and quality of the protection available, for a well-equipped and skilled leader. The letter codes chosen were, at the time, identical to the American system for rating the content of movies. Grades range from solid protection, G, to no protection, X. The G and PG ratings are often left out, as being typical of normal, everyday climbing. PG13 ratings are occasionally included. R and X climbs are usually noted as a caution to the unwary leader. Application of protection ratings varies widely from area to area and from guidebook to guidebook.

British

The British grading system for traditional climbs, also known as the [|UK grading system], used in Great Britain and Ireland, has two parts: the adjectival grade and the technical grade.
Sport climbing in Britain and Ireland uses the French grading system, often prefixed with the letter "F".

Adjectival grade

The adjectival grade attempts to assess the overall difficulty of the climb – taking into account all factors which lend difficulty to a pitch including technical difficulty, sustainedness, protection quality, rock quality, exposure and other less tangible aspects – for a climber leading the route on sight in traditional style. It thus resembles mountaineering grades such as the International French Adjectival System. The adjectival grade appears to have been introduced in the early 20th century by O. G. Jones, who classified climbs as “Easy”; “Moderate”; “Difficult” or “Exceptionally Severe”. Increasing standards have several times led to extra grades being added. The adjectival grades are as follows:
Increasing standards in the 1970s resulted in the adoption of Pete Botterill's proposal that the Extremely Severe grade be subdivided in an open-ended fashion into E1, E2, E3 and so on. The E-grade is still an estimation of overall difficulty experienced by a climber leading a route on-sight.
In 2006 the hardest grade claimed was E11 for Rhapsody on Dumbarton Rock, climbed by Dave MacLeod, featured French 8c/+ climbing with the potential of a 20-metre fall onto a small wire. In August 2008, MacLeod completed a new project close to Tower Ridge on Ben Nevis called 'Echo Wall'. He left the route ungraded, saying only that it was 'harder than Rhapsody'. Many climbers consider such high grades provisional, as the climbs have not yet been achieved on-sight/ground-up.
The grade "XS" is sometimes used for eXtremely Severe rock climbs when a high proportion of the challenge is due to objective dangers, typically loose or crumbling rock, rather than technical difficulty.

Technical grade

The technical grade attempts to assess only the technical climbing difficulty of the hardest move or short sequence of moves on the route, without regard to the danger of the move or the stamina required if there are several such moves in a row. Technical grades are open-ended, starting at 1 and subdivided into "a", "b" and "c", but are rarely used below 3c. The technical grade was originally a bouldering grade introduced from Fontainebleau by French climbers.
Usually the technical grade increases with the adjectival grade, but a hard technical move that is well protected may not raise the standard of the adjectival grade very much. VS 4c might be a typical grade for a route. VS 4a might indicate very poor protection or extremely sustained, while VS 5b would usually indicate one crux move of 5b that is the first move or very well protected and the rest of the climb without much difficulty. On multi-pitch routes it is usual to give the overall climb an adjectival grade and each pitch a separate technical grade.

UIAA

The UIAA grading system is mostly used for short rock routes in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary. On long routes it is often used in the Alps and Himalaya. Using Roman numerals, it was originally intended to run from I to VI, but as with all other grading systems, improvements to climbing standards have led to the system being open-ended after the grade VII was accepted in 1977. An optional + or − may be used to further differentiate difficulty. As of 2016, the hardest climbs are XII.

Cracow Scale (Skala Kurtyki)

In the '70s, in Poland, the UIAA scale was in use, when climbing limestone rocks near Cracow, where Polish sport climbing was developed. Grade-I route was considered a walk, while Grade-VI was described as "hardest". As climbing level was growing, the scale seemed more and more inadequate. Famous climber and alpinist Wojciech Kurtyka proposed an extension to the scale. Simpler routes were described as it was before - using Roman numerals. Harder ones - using Arabic numerals after Roman VI. Hence, after traditional VI+ came VI.1, VI.1+, VI.2 and so on. Currently, the hardest route graded in Cracow Scale is Stal Mielec in Mamutowa cave, Jura Krakowsko-Czestochowska, graded as VI.8+.

Scandinavian

In Sweden, Norway, and Finland, they originally used the UIAA scale. But since it was thought that 6+ would be the definition of how hard humans could climb, no climber wanted to put up this grade, leaving the entire scale very sand-bagged compared to the UIAA scale. To show that it is a Scandinavian grade, Arabic numerals are used, and for UIAA graded climbs in Scandinavia, Roman numerals are used. In some guide books, where many Germans have done the first ascent, the UIAA scale is used for those climbs, and where the first ascent is done by a Scandinavian, the Scandinavian scale is used. The only way to know how the climb is rated is to know the first ascentist is German or Scandinavian. In sport climbing the French scale is pretty common, or both scales are used in the guide book, with the other scale in parentheses, i.e. 6+.

Saxon grades

The Saxon grading system is used in the Free State of Saxony in Germany and in a derivative form in some areas in the Czech Republic under the name. It was developed in the beginning of the 20th century for the formidable Saxon Switzerland climbing region and was gradually adopted within other climbing areas in the region, such as Bohemian Switzerland, Bohemian Paradise, Lusatian Mountains, and the Zittau Mountains.
Due to the climbing particularities of the region and the territorial and political division of Germany in 1945–1990 the system developed independently from other grading systems in Germany. During this time it was also sometimes referred to as the "East German System".
The Saxon grades use Roman numerals to denote the level of difficulty and subdivisions from grade VII onwards with the aid of the letter a, b and c; XIc is currently the highest grade. In addition the system accounts for horizontal jumps with Arabic numerals between 1 and 7.

French numerical grades

The French numerical system rates a climb according to the overall technical difficulty and strenuousness of the route. Grades start at 1 and the system is open-ended. Each numerical grade can be subdivided by adding a letter. Examples: 2, 4, 4b, 6a, 7c. An optional + may be used to further differentiate difficulty. For example, these routes are sorted by ascending difficulty: 5c+, 6a, 6a+, 6b, 6b+. Although some countries in Europe use a system with similar grades but not necessarily matching difficulties, the French system remains the main system used in the vast majority of European countries and in many international events outside the US.

http://www.cbme.org.br/novo/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/CBME_DT_2016_01-1-1.pdf Brazilian

The Brazilian grade system for sport climbing is similar to the French system, but uses roman numerals with a few adjustments: grades I to II are very easy, III to V are easy and it progresses till the maximum grade of XIII, as of 2020. Grades below VII are subdivided differently depending on the geographical location of the crag:
The Brazilian system has a remarkably detailed grading system for traditional climbing, which due to the geology in the country consists mostly of long, bolted/mixed routes instead of pure crack climbing. The basic structure is given in the example below.
DurationGeneral gradeHardest move Hardest aidDanger component
D35ºVIsup A2+E2

It is important to keep in mind that all the items in the grading system are independent. One can then have grades like "D4 4º VIIc A3 E3", or "D1 7º VIIc E1". The first route takes a whole day to be climbed, mostly on easy terrain, but with some serious aid and a very hard crux that cannot be bypassed by aiding. The second route, on the other hand, has much harder free climbing than the first one, but is safer, shorter and a crux that can be aid climbed as an A0.

Ewbank

The Ewbank system, used in Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, was developed in the mid 1960s by John Ewbank. Ewbank also developed an open ended “M” system for aid climbing. The numerical Ewbank system is open-ended, starting from 1, which one can walk up, to the four climbs located in Australia given the hardest currently confirmed grade of 35. South African and Australian grades differ by 1 or 2 grade points.
The Ewbank system is not intended to simply grade the hardest individual move on a climb though the grading system is often described this way. Ewbank explained "Grading takes the following into consideration: Technical difficulty, exposure, length, quality of rock, protection and other smaller factors. As these are more or less all related to each other, I have rejected the idea of 3 or 4 grades, i.e. one for exposure, one for technical difficulty, one for protection etc. Instead the climb is given its one general grading, and if any of the other factors is outstanding, this is stated verbally in the short introduction to that climb"
The current practice is to make mention of all factors affecting the climber's experience in the description of the climb contained in the guide.

Machine Learning

Researchers have demonstrated that the difficulty of climbing routes can be predicted using statistical models and machine learning techniques. A Bradley-Terry model based on historical ascents generated ratings on an interval scale that were correlated with grades from the Ewbank system. A different approach, using a variable-order Markov model with a description of the sequence of climbing moves, was unable to correctly predict difficulty.

Mountaineering

There are several systems in use to grade mountain climbs. Alpine mountaineering routes are usually graded based on all of their different aspects, as they can be very diverse. Thus, a mountain route may be graded 5.6, A2, WI3, M5 *, 70 degrees, 4000 ft, VI, and many other factors. See also Summitpost Alpine Grades.

International French [|adjectival system] (IFAS)

In contrast to the French numerical system, the French adjectival alpine system evaluates the overall difficulty of a route, taking into consideration the length, difficulty, exposure and commitment-level of the route. The overall grade combines altitude; length and difficulty of approach and descent; number of difficult pitches and how sustained they are; exposure; and quality of rock, snow and ice. These are, in increasing order:
Often a + or a − is placed after the grade to indicate if a particular climb is at the lower or upper end of that grade.

Romanian

The alpine routes in Romania are rated in the Russian grading system, reflecting the overall difficulty of the route. This is why most documentation also contains the UIAA free-climbing rating of the crux of the route, as well as the aid-climbing rating and the then resulting free climbing rate.
The routes themselves are, however, usually only marked with the overall grade at the bottom. The grades go from 1 to 7, and a good parallel can be established with the French rating. Instead of +/-, the letters A and B are used to designate the lower or upper ends of a grade.

New Zealand

An alpine grading system adapted from the grades used in the Aoraki/Mt Cook Region is widely used in New Zealand for alpine routes in the North and South islands. Grades currently go from 1–7. The grading system is open ended; harder climbs are possible. Factors which determine grade are : technical difficulty, objective danger, length and access.
Standard grading system for alpine routes in normal conditions
In the Alaskan grading system, mountaineering climbs range from grade 1–6, and factor in difficulty, length, and commitment. The hardest, longest routes are Alaskan grade 6. The system was first developed by Boyd N. Everett, Jr. in 1966, and is supposed to be particularly adapted to the special challenges of Alaskan climbing. Here is a summary of Alaska grade descriptors, adapted from Alaska: A Climbing Guide, by Michael Wood and Colby Coombs :
A plus may be added to indicate somewhat higher difficulty. For example, the West Buttress Route on Denali is graded 2+ in the above-mentioned guidebook.
It is important to remember that even an Alaska Grade 1 climb may involve climbing on snow and glaciers in remote locations and cold weather.

Russian (post-USSR countries)

In post USSR countries, there is Russian grading system, it includes range from grade 1A–6B, and factor in difficulty, altitude, length, and commitment like in Alaskan.
and mixed climbing have a number of grading systems.

WI numeric scale

This system measures the difficulty of routes on water ice. The WI scale spans grades from 1 to 7. There also exists a rating scale for Alpine Ice that has the same rating system as the "WI" system, but is instead denoted by "AI." The primary difference between the two is the density of the ice, Water Ice being much more dense.
WI2 – low-angled, with good technique can be easily climbed with one ice axe. Grades beyond this generally require the use of two ice tools.
WI3 – generally sustained in the 60–70 degree range with occasional near-vertical steps up to 4 metres
WI4 – near-vertical steps of up to 10 metres, generally sustained climbing requiring placing protection screws from strenuous stances
WI4+ – highly technical WI4.
WI5 – near-vertical or vertical steps of up to 20 metres, sustained climbing requiring placing multiple protection screws from strenuous stances with few good rests
WI5+ – highly technical WI5
WI6 – vertical climbing for the entire pitch with no rests. Requires excellent technique and/or a high level of fitness
WI6+ – vertical or overhanging with no rests, and highly technical WI6
WI7 – sustained and overhanging with no rests. Extremely rare, near-mythical, and widely accepted testpiece examples of this grade don't exist in the Canadian Rockies. Note that many routes have been assigned WI7− to WI7+ but have been subsequently downgraded in later years as they don't meet the strict criteria of difficulty.
WI11 – Previously unheard of climbing running steep to horizontal through aerated spray ice. The only known example is Wolverine at Helmcken Falls, Canada. The grade was given to reflect previous M11 climbing experiences of first and second ascentionists. Calling something "WI11" flies in the face of the strict WI grading criteria. Wolverine can be no harder than WI7+ by these criteria.

M numeric scale

This measures the difficulty of mixed climbs combining ice and rock. Mixed climbs have recently been climbed and graded as high as M14.
In the British Isles, the Scottish winter grading system is used for both ice and mixed climbs. Originally the system had just an overall grade given in Roman numerals running up to VI, but this has been refined and extended. Routes are given two grades, essentially equivalent to the adjectival and technical grades used in British traditional climbing. Overall difficulty is signified by a Roman numeral, and the technical difficulty of the hardest move or section of the climb is graded with an Arabic numeral. For routes of grade I – III, the technical grade is usually omitted unless it is 4 or greater. As with other grading systems, advances in climbing have led to the acceptance of an open-ended grading system, and climbs have now been graded up to XII, 12.
There are many grading systems used specifically for bouldering problems, including:
are graded A0 to A5 depending on the reliability of the gear placements and the consequences of a fall. New routes climbed today are often given a “New Wave” grade using the original symbols but with new definitions. Depending on the area in question, the letter “A” may mean that the use of pitons is needed to ascend the route. The letter “C” explicitly indicates that the route can be climbed clean without the use of a hammer.

Original grading system

The 'C' scale adopts "New Wave" definitions. Clean aiding is aid climbing without the use of bolting gear, pitons or other gear that scars the rock or becomes fixed after the ascent. Most difficult aid climbs still require pitons or other techniques using a hammer, and are thus rated on the "New Wave" 'A' scale past a certain point.

Free climbing

The following chart compares some of the free climbing grading systems in use around the world.
As mentioned above, grading is a subjective task and no two grading systems have an exact one-to-one correspondence. Therefore, there is not a perfect agreement in the literature about grading system comparisons or conversion rules.
The British Adj grades do not grade only the hardness of the climb but the overall feel of the route, i.e., how hard gear is to place, how good is the gear, how high up is the first piece of gear, the possibility and severity of a ground fall, and how dangerous the climb is. All these factors are regarded when giving it the grade.
Russian grade system can be compared in the following way:

Bouldering

The following grades are used for rating boulder problems throughout the world. Although fundamental differences in climbing style make direct comparison between bouldering and route climbing difficult, the colors in the above and below tables correspond to roughly equivalent sets of grades.