Hmm. I think there’s something about this that rings true and yet...
Ok, so what if there were a set of cliff faces that had the property that climbing the bigger ones was more important and also that climbing tools worked better on them. Yet, despite the tools working better on the large cliffs, the smaller cliffs were easier to climb (both because the routes were shorter, and because the routes were less technical). Seems like if your goal is to design climbing equipment that will be helpful on large cliff faces, you should test the climbing equipment on large cliff faces, even if that means you won’t have the satisfaction of completing any of your testing climbs.
What if you tried to figure out a way to understand the “canonical cliffness” and design a new line of equipment that could be tailored to fit any “slope”… Which cliff would you test first? 🤔
Hmm. I think there’s something about this that rings true and yet...
Ok, so what if there were a set of cliff faces that had the property that climbing the bigger ones was more important and also that climbing tools worked better on them. Yet, despite the tools working better on the large cliffs, the smaller cliffs were easier to climb (both because the routes were shorter, and because the routes were less technical). Seems like if your goal is to design climbing equipment that will be helpful on large cliff faces, you should test the climbing equipment on large cliff faces, even if that means you won’t have the satisfaction of completing any of your testing climbs.
What if you tried to figure out a way to understand the “canonical cliffness” and design a new line of equipment that could be tailored to fit any “slope”… Which cliff would you test first? 🤔