i find the whole physical discrimination claim ridiculous. Every olympic sport massively favors specific physical traits. None of these competitions were ever fair.
Sure, but not all sports are the same. Basketball will always favor height. Depending on route-setting, climbing might favor height, balance, dynamic movement, etc. I don't think discrimination is the right word, but route-setting that only rewards one style rather than showcasing a diversity of skills doesn't do climbing justice.
In my local gym, Hannah Midtbø (Magnus' strong sister) is the chief setter, which means that when I complain about being too short (170 cm or 5'7) for a particular route or boulder, I have to do so knowing that Ms Midtbø is shorter, and that I'm simply too weak...
But were you able to atleast grab the starting holds in your local gym? Sure if the entire boulder routes were tweaked to fit within Ai Mori's height, then they could potentially become much easier for the other competitors. However, I do believe that each competitor should atleast get a fair chance at being able to start a boulder. I don't care how tough it is made to be after the start holds, which don't get me wrong don't have to be easy as long as it is not height dependent, it's ok if it is a skill/technique issue. Or maybe I'm full of shit since Brooke managed to do em xD
I feel like they put too much dyno stuff in climbing tournaments because it just "looks flashier" for the viewers. Statics are just as hard, but most people won't understand what's doing on, while everyone can understand BEEG JUMP
@@Thorinbur The thing is, the sports wont exist at this level, if not for the viewers. So no, it's not maybe for viewers... It is for viewers... and companies would like to fulfill that entertainment need. I personally don't care if the athlete would prefer if the sport was more skill based, and less interesting to watch... because I'd just, well... not watch... and so would the vast majority of viewers.
I feel like that despite Ai Mori being short, she could defenitly keep on working on her weaknesses and make it work if we compare it to brooke. I'm baiscally saying that it isn't "only height". But the setters could have not overused big dynamic moves in every boulders. Especially not on almost every start, which doesn't make much sense. It's not as if the start move is supposed to be impressive and determine the athlete's fate. If you can't get past the crux of the bolder, fair enough, but putting too much emphasis on the starting position feels kinda usless and unrewarding.
I don't know a way to nerf the height advantage besides going the other way and making things too small to be comfortable. taller ppl will always be able to reach better. the only thing you can check is jumping power. taler ppl might have less but make up for it with reach while short ppl might be able to jump relatively higher. but tall ppl can also work on jump power.
@@ab7483 that's just not true, in bouldering there's lot of situations that heavily favor shorter athletes too, like very tight moves that require a lot more crunching for taller climbers which pulls them away from the wall. It's climbing, not high jump. Jumping power is a tiny part of the sport but a massive part of these events because it looks impressive to the layman on TV (despite the actual most impressive moment of the whole finals was Ai's extremely controlled and technical send of boulder 3).
As someone who loves absolutely nothing more than a big ol' dyno.. everything doesn't have to be dynos. Especially when you're looking to make the competition a well-rounded one. I don't think Ai Mori got "scammed" but it was unfortunate for her that there was so much dyno. She wasn't well-suited to the routes. Sad days but there will be events some people are better at and some events others are better at.
@@ab7483 an easy way to fix this is balancing out the dyno/crimp ratio and making smaller boxes for the crimp sections. just put both types of climbers at a disadvantage and see how they work around it using their skill. also Ai Mori definetly didn't use all her potential on the starting holds. she barely jogged towards them and didn't use her arms for momentum properly, while her front leg pushed her away from the wall instead of up. that's a problem that can be fixed in one session together with a freerunner. i can wall run a 3.50 meter wall with no holds and i'm neither 6 feet tall nor a pro athlete. of course parkour won't help in mid section dinos, but being tall won't help in tight crimp sections either, so it's fair.
@@tomthecasual5337 I mean parkour will help in mid section dynos just because that type of movement might not be 1 for 1 applicable, but like.. I spent years doing parkour, and it definitely transfers at least somewhat. The parkour kind of kinematic awareness and dynamic understanding of how gravity works are probably gonna help you no matter what kinda dyno you find yourself on, I figure.
While I completely agree that this comp exposed Ai's weakness for explosive power (which Brooke has in spades) let's not discount the fact that those dynamic moves were LOADS easier for the taller competitors and that gave them a huge advantage in number of attempts and energy conserved. I don't recall any particularly small box moves/sequences to balance that out. Largely because routesetters are also setting for the audiences with big flashy risky moves. That said, the competitors all know this stuff when they go out there so, that's the game.
I agree, maybe there was a lack of tiny boxes moves. As you said, unfortunately, these moves do not look that impressive on camera, leading in a bias in representation of both style. Edit: actually, Boulder 3 of women's finals was said to advantage smaller climbers, so there's that
This exactly. The easiest boulder of the 4 Ai couldn't do because of her size and lack of dynamism (which is no issue for Brooke) but it was easy points for the taller athletes and those 25 points did cost Ai a medal. Now I wouldn't say that's bullying, it's just how the setting is these days for bouldering but I think it's fair to say it was to Ai's disadvantage.
At some point length starts being a disadvantage on those moves because your center of gravity gets further away from the wall while winding up. The sweetspot is probably just above Brooke's height. Janja is only 6 cm taller than her.
There was a box move in the overhanging boulder in the final. Janja was able to turn around in the overhang with strength, Ai just needed less strength because she fitted between the hanging volumes better.
I'm not a climber, but even I realised during your video the problem wasn't that Ai Mori is too short or that she's not strong enough (she's 2nd in the world for a reason). It seems like 1 specific type of hold was overused. Not only does that make it less interesting to watch, but it doesn't test the whole range of skills of the climbers. Having multiple large running starts and dynamic holds early on sounds like it is skewed towards one set of abilities whereas a more diverse set of starts could have made for more interesting competition. It's like if you start an exam and 60% of the questions are on only 1 part of the course. It doesn't mean it's rigged or a scam, but it probably doesn't represent the actual course well
There are some tests in professional fields that, when you miss one question, will cause the computer examining you to immediately focus on the specific area you just failed and pound you on it. That's how the insurance licensing test is in California. There used to be a workaround which was to very quickly skip all questions to lock them into place so that your errors couldn't lead to changes in the questions. That workaround has been eliminated by only allowing you to pass a limited number of questions -- although you can still pass the ones you think might lead down rabbit holes.
« one inch does not make a difference » Actually, yes, it does. If you are one inch short of grabbing a hold, you don’t grab it. That’s how geometry works.
+ People can have different torso/arm/leg lengths even if same height, meaning there may be more then an inch differences where it counts . At something like the Olympics, those small advantages/disadvantages matter much more.
@@hefoxedfor real, he’s talking about height here (and apparently the difference is 4cm so closer to 2 inches) but that’s only an indicative of reach. Height above the shoulders doesn’t matter because you don’t reach holds with the top of your head, you do it with your hands and fingers. Ai mori with what looks to be a negative or neutral ape index vs an already taller brooke raboutou who looks to have a fairly positive one could have a difference in horizontal reach of 2-3 inches and vertical reach of 2-4 inches. And this is not between average height climbers, it’s on the absolute shortest ones. That’s not the difference between tall-average-short climbers having to be more dynamic vs just static-ing a move, it’s the difference between being able to hold onto a move vs being physically incapable of going past it.
Yeah, like you can see in the footage that a lot of the holds she misses she just *barely* misses. As in she would've gotten them if she had just a half inch more of reach. In a few spots you can see her fingertips barely brush against the hold she's trying to grab showing that it is a matter of about an inch. Honestly there are two solutions the set runners could go with: Either don't make everything cater to tall contestants early in the climbs *or* divide the competition into height classes and adjust the route accordingly. Yes the Olympics aren't technically supposed to be "fair" in traditional sporting senses, but when you have a top ranked competitor who can't even start some of the courses because you made it slightly too big for them, that's not a skill issue on their part and it shouldn't be treated as such. That being said, I don't think the route setters were actively discriminating against her. I think they were trying to be flashy as possible and spaced things out farther for the hype factor.
Having an extra inch absolutely matters! It means there is more bend in your limbs to allow you to move from that position. Don't get me wrong,I love Brooke and she has amazing skills. Ai and Brooke's ape index also need to be taken into account ,Brooke has a bigger span than Ai as well. An extra inch means you can overshoot a jump by an inch and land ON the hold and not just slap it. It's not like people have velcro skin and are able to hold holds and move from them just because they can reach, you still need to control them. Try jumping from a full split or swinging from straight arms. Try holding start holds that make you hold tension from the TIPS of your fingers to the tips of your toes THEN jump from that. 1 inch means more skin or rubber on a hold, a palm rather than three finger pads or a bent knee or ankle to even have a chance to spring up. It was unfortunate that Ai couldn't even start boulders and because Brooke could do them watered down how much of a great climber Ai is despite being disadvantaged "by JUST an inch". Both of them are great beta breakers who adapt climbs to their size,the routes could've been better to allow more creativity. Flashy and impressive moves come out not just in dynamic movement.
I honestly don’t mind a lead route having an early crux, but it’s definitely not great to see Tomoa go from 2nd place to not qualifying for finals at all. Alex Megos’s reaction to the foot slip was also particularly heartbreaking
As a former competitor, I do. It means far more luck and less skill is represented at the podium. Especially a move reliant on a fickle foot is sad and sloppy from the setters. Competitive lead climbs are supposed to increase in difficulty the higher you go so that people get weeded out in order based off endurance and skill level
I mean most people just midread that part. The way for anraku for example does it with the high toehook is way higher % and if most people did it that way most of them wouldnt have fallen off.
@@Arunnn241yeah he just released a video talking about this, and the crazy thing is he initially planned on doing the toe hook. He only decided to bump because he thought releasing the toe hook would disrupt his flow. Basically he chalks it up to looking too far ahead and not focusing on the move in front of him. Still gutted for him though.
For real. Honestly, this was some of the best setting I've seen in international comps. Sure a couple boulders didn't get topped. A move away from a lead top. That's nearly perfect to me.
i dont think anyone can convince me that the routsetters meant for the low crux to be this hard. we all want the athletes to be able to fight not to fall off after 5 seconds
anyone that watched the world cup comps all year knows 100% the setters made that boulder knowing ai wouldn't be able to start it. The setters are very good at what they do and made a choice and they chose to include a boulder they knew ai wouldn't be able to start.
Why, though? If some athletes can do it, it's fine with me. A scandal would be if all, or nearly all, can't do it. The rest is just differences in climbing performance.
@@asdffsdafdsafdsa7877But wouldn't it be unfair as well to not do this *because* they knew, i.e. catering to one specific athlete? What's next? Some athletes suck at dynos and they make only static routes?
Isnt' the point of a course to highlight the differences between athletes? If all athletes can compete the course it was too easy if they all fail it was too hard. You want a course that people fail on. These are supposed to be the best athletes which means they're going to need harder courses than you see for casual people. You need to see people fail so you know that the people who completed have actual skill. This isnt' a walk in the park, its a professional competition.
@@supernova743 personally when I'm bouldering if the hardest part of the problem is just getting established on the wall and the rest of the problem is easy I think it's a garbage problem. considering the rest of the problem seemed easy and iirc brooke took several attempts to even get on the wall but then flashed the rest I don't think it was a good problem.
Brooke has 1 inch of height on Ai but also a positive ape index which Ai doesn't. And seeing how close Ai got to establish on W1, I'm pretty sure a few cm would have made the difference. BTW, some people have graphed the attempts by height on W1 and there is a clear cut correlation. Saying that height didn't play any role whatsoever is the real copium. But even with all of that, Ai is weak with dynos, and height isn't the only reason why she didn't get a medal. And she knows it. We can only hope that she puts the correct emphasis in her training.
Correct. Obviously height makes a difference, but given the right training she could have performed better at the points she failed. As far as i'm concerned she is an exceptional athlete worthy of our absolute respect. But that doesn't mean she can't improve further. I'm pretty sure nobody has reached the limit of what is possible in the sport, and that includes her.
I don't the real complaint is that they were set too hard for AI's height, but rather that they were set far too dynamically for Ai's style. You could set 4 incredibly varied brutal static boulders that AI would send and half of the other womens bouldering giants couldn't, but instead comps are favouring the dynamic style that is particularly AI's weakness. A lot of people don't like the dynamic style more generally, apparently even the non-climbing public find it less entertaining, and it is objectively the furthest from climbings roots. So the argument goes "Setting is consistently being done in a less entertaining, more manufarctured style that unfairly disadvantages a specific climber who is far stronger in other technical aspects than competition who is outperforming her on the setting. This is unfair, and a better comp setting paradigm would see competitions that are more entertaining, more akin to real rock, and more suited to Ai's strengths". It does kind of suck to see one of your favourite athletes fail because the setting favours the paradigm you already want to see gone for independent reasons.
The routesetters can't really set to every single athlete's strengths and weaknesses. Nothing wrong with that. Dynos and coordination move boulders are popular right now so they will be set. Ai has no excuse other than just not training those types of boulders enough. Brooke is basically the same height and can do it. Don't blame the routesetters when Ai herself has admitted that she just doesn't train for those types of boulders. A boulder&lead winner needs to be good at every style not just one, and that is where Ai falls short.
@@ppstorm_ "Compelling arguments, Mr. Bond. Very well articulated, very sensible and cogent. And all supported by data - it’s impressive. But unfortunately for you I have just called your take 'brain-dead'. The game is up"
They really should. But we've known for years now that they favor dynamic moves for the cameras. And I read somewhere that for the olympics, where non-climbers are likely to tune in much more than usual, there was extra emphasis placed on the moves being easy for spectators to read. (not necessarily the beta being obvious, but like being able to see which moves require a lot of power or flexibility when you see a competitor perform them.)
Only problem is that when they put in boulders that are static and only require strength almost all the climbers will flash them since they are so strong.
@@PositiveOnly-dm3rx uhhh, that kinda is how it works... ever heard of weight classes? Weightlifting scores and medals are awarded separately among people of a similar weight.
@@EvilMastermindThe amount of simpage for Ai is insane. Even she, herself, says that she had no one to blame but herself because she has weaker legs/jumping strength than the other competitors. Yet, these people still want to cry as if the route setters PURPOSEFULLY did it purely to make sure ONLY Ai wouldn't win. These people are embarassing 🤦♂️
Trying to defend the Route setting with Brooke making it is almost like defending it with Janja making it. Brooke was the 2nd strongest Boulderer in the world and even she needed multiple attempts just to establish the start. The start of a route should not be this insanely difficult... since it gives zero points. It just makes for a terrible watch and leads to exactly the kind of crap that came after.
"Brooke was the 2nd strongest Boulderer in the world and even she needed multiple attempts just to establish the start." Isn't that exactly what we're looking for? The best can do it, and the others can't.
Part of route setting for competition is to create a setting where the points will be spread. Having a climb with a difficult start creates spread between the climbers, a tricky start or weird crux is how they create division between the climbers so that not all these insanely talented climbers start easy and go straight up. What if an amazing climber from another country joins and is half a foot shorter than Ai? Then possibly no dynamic movement for them would be possible. I avoid dynamic climbing myself I love static climbing way more but I understand why it's used for competition.
@@meinultrautube3873 I mean sure I agree, as a viewer and a climber I don't like it when establishing the starting position is hard. But this has nothing to do with fairness and height.
@@calvinsomething5348she did it because she was the better climber and if the routes were at least physically possible for her, even if barely, she often skilled/powered her way through them. But we know that the ifsc very heavily leans into parkour-y, flashy, dynamic style routes while barely featuring technical routes with boxy moves and such to balance it out. The few that feature like this are often very hard for other climbers but doable, whereas out of all the dynamic ones of which most are hard for ai, there’s a few that are outright physically impossible.
@@calvinsomething5348 No, the evidence is right there. She's one of the best in the world, by far the best at her height. The only one to match and surpass Janja in lead, often makes bouldering finals over great climbers without her height struggle and also gets many of the dynos and such moves that she struggles with. She is clearly at or near her peak and has known for a long time that reach is the one weakness she has to train to overcome and despite that there's still dynos and reachy moves she never even comes close to getting. It's waaaaay more of a guess you're making to think that those are physically possible for her but she just hasn't put in the effort or figured them out. Also comp climbing isn't even remotely like outdoor climbing (especially with the obsession with flashy moves) and if anything what it should be copying from outdoor climbing is "more technical moves" to balance it out, not "it should be unfair".
@@calvinsomething5348thing about natural rock walls is, you are able to choose which climbs you want to do. You aren’t forced to try a climb that is very difficult for your style. An idea for a competition format I think would be interesting is if there was 6 boulders and you got to choose which 4 you attempt.
4cm is not 1 inch. It is 1.57 inch. And adding the arms reach above the head it is about 2 inches. It is also possible, that their body proportions are not the same and one of them has relatively longer arms. If it is Brooke it may easily make 2.5 inches difference. 2.5inch or 10cm still doesn't make a difference? If You analyse facts, be a bit more meticulous to give your analysis any sense.
As if any sport is ever fair. It is not just about skill and hard work, being born with the right body is just required for being the best. Every sport is discriminating in that sense
@@horseradish843 That is generally true. But there is a little difference between classic simple disciplines like runs or jumps, where conditions are well-defined constants, and disciplines where event organizer may easily influence results (to a significant extent) through deliberate actions. And I'm not saying, they were cheating on purpose here. I'm saying (sadly) that it is possible, and it is - probably inevitable - flaw of this discipline.
Ai Mori also has a NEGATIVE ape index.. she has extremely short arms even compared to her height.. ultimately she does need to work on dynamic sequences and improve in a number of ways to improve in bouldering, but she is massively disadvantaged by not just height but length as well..
When you’re competing against the best, every little bit makes a difference. It’s like how an average Joe taking steroids doesn’t make a difference but if you are one of the best, the extra boost from steroids makes the difference.
They will, they were required to be the same this year because they only had 2 sets of medals because it's only the 2nd time they were in the Olympics and they needed to separate speed
@@awerawer0708 Yeah that is an easy fix if the IOC has issues with amount of events, speed is usually its own sport seperate from the main rock climbing walls in most events is not treated as being the same as lead or boldring, speed is a newer concept from the 1990's that is less impressive then regular rock wall climbing.
I think Aidan Roberts has the best take on this (careless talk podcast): it was simply too much points that came down to the one skill "vertical jumps". And i do think this is a problem for the sport more, than that Ai missed out on an obvious medal. The routsetters have too much power over who competes for the medals. They knew that she most likely would be out of the competition when they chose these boudlers. We, the audience, have no way of knowing if the boulders where set with that intent or just were set like that anyway. That is much more of a problem than Ai not getting her olympic medal.
umm... basketball? should we set hoops lower for shorter people so its not so dependent on height and vertical jumps? weightlifting? should we start scoring based on percentage of body weight lifted? this is not how sports work.
@@PositiveOnly-dm3rxBasketball has very strict rules that do not change and have not changed for decades. Climbing in general constantly changes. That outdoor boulder someone climbed 20 years ago may not even exist anymore, or the holds have changed due to erosion or a billion other natural reasons. That boulder set in your local climbing gym that you climb last week might not be there anymore because the setters of the gym went through and redid them all. The thing is that climbing caters to all styles, all levels of strength, all body types. There will be routes that are incredibly easy for a 6ft tall person while nigh impossible for someone a whole foot shorter. Someone could show incredible dynamic skill but struggle with a lot of static moves. That doesn’t mean you can’t train both of those things. The issue arises when 90% of the boulders cater to a singular style and/or set of skills. It also comes up when you only move on to lead climbing if you can get through the bouldering section.
This. This problem might be also a little bit more complex or lets's say "more fine-granular", because of the positioning of difficult moves: If this kind of jump is the start of a relatively easy boulder, it has a very big impact on the ranking. So the problem is not only that routsetters have the power to disadvantage certain body types on some boulders, they can also decide where to sort out. Sorting out at the start is quite unnecessary in my opinion. Regardless of whether it was intentional this time or just a little carelessness, the setters should be a litte bit more aware of this power and meet their responsibility not to disadvantage specific athletes with this kind of move.... especially on relatively easy boulders, where climbers with weaker performances are capable to top
I mean, I love dynos too, but having all boulders contains at least one dyno, and making all of them about large, even running moves made no sense. I get they want to showcase the spectacular dinamic moves but come on, all of them? I know that comp climbing doesnt have to be a representation of outdoors climbing, but if this trend continues the gap between outdoor (true climbing) and competition climbing will be so big that competitions will completely stop being a measure of someones climbing abilities.
I guess I can mostly agree. However, me personally, I don't see a particular problem with that. Competition bouldering is becoming its own beast and I am all here for it. If I want to see "true" climbing I will watch Adam send Silence or Bosi on Burden. I love the hardcore outdoors and I love the spectacle, coordination, strength, technique and drama of the plastic. ❤
It’s because at this point all athletes can climb static but not all athletes can climb dynamically. They have to create new ways to challenge and separate the athletes otherwise the sport will stagnate and become uninteresting to watch.
@@samvalentine9243This is a load of bullshit. There are plenty of absurdly hard climbs without any dynos. You can even find a bunch watching the bouldering circuit. The reason they are disappearing is because dynos are showy for TV
@@petkras oh, it's bullshit that setters have to find new ways to challenge athletes? Explain, because what you said doesn't refute my point at all. The existence of hard static climbs doesn't negate the need for dynamic moves to separate and challenge the competitors. The sport has to incorporate ALL aspects of climbing movement to remain fresh and exciting, because, yes, if it's not entertaining to watch on TV the sport will die. That's the whole point of televised sport competition.
What amazed me about Ai and Toby Roberts was their calmness under pressure. Ai had so much ground to make up on the lead climb but she was as cool as a cucumber. Toby Roberts knew that Tomoa had gone out early on that lead final route, but he kept his head and didn't seem to make a single error. When Sorato walked out I noticed that he made a little nervous flinch. I felt the need to chalk up just watching it live!
Saying that because brooke can do a climb therefore Ai should be able to is kind of missing the point. Ai's height did put her at a disadvantage, that doesnt mean the climbs are impossible for short people, it just heavily favours the taller climbers.
Ai’s height also put her at an advantage for some moves. And it IS the point. If people are whining that it’s because she is short and it’s unfair, then yes, we definitely get to point out Brooke.
@@derekstanyeryep. Can’t remember which boulder it was in the she did it on but Ai was able to lock her leg inbetween two boulders allowing her to recover and continue on. Pretty sure she was one only of two or three that topped that particular set.
it's the olympics you fukin donut. the high jump favours tall people, the 100m sprint favours fast people, etc. LET'S JUST GIVE EVERYONE A GOLD MEDAL FOR PARTICIPATING FOR THE CRYBABIES
so does basketball weightlifting and footballl favor bigger guys. wrestling favors taller people too. running favors faster people. its like you dont understand what a sport is.
I'm a climber, slim and measuring almost 2 meters high, I can say that usually it really makes a difference, I can climb routes that my shorter female friends can't do, even though some of 'em have way more physical strength than I.
Real climbing has gone through height fads, depending on who was best at the time, both tall and short. Lynn Hill who was a great climber by any standard, is said to have possibly had an advantage being the first person to climb the nose, because of smaller hands to fit in the crux crack.
Hey! Im the head setter on a college campus alongside my baby sister. When we set we actually have to have to be super mindful about an inch difference from 5'0 to 5'1 as there are moves that my incredibly strong sister can't get done with just a 1 inch disadvantage. To say 1 inch doesn't matter when we're never faced with height issues in climbing is dumb bruh. Theres always eventually a height at which things become impossible to do so. There is always a 1 inch difference at some point between possible and impossible. Truly believe Mori got done dirty.
I remember there was a boulder comp in 2023, AI and Brooke both suffered on a single dyno move, and Brooke improved a lot after that. Some just can't acknowledge the fact that AI wasn't improving her lower body power, however Brooke did.
I think this is 100% a fair statement but there was a lot of sketchy route setting throughout the whole competition. Hopefully Ai uses it as motivation to get swole
AI mori been this way for a while. I've been watching her for 2 years now and she just doesn't do well on power moves. It's actually so sad that I can't watch her when she stays so happy despite not getting past the first move.
The only real issues I had: - The sport needs separate events for bouldering and lead climb, as well as combination. Most of the best lead climbers on real rock can boulder too, but they are distinct events and should be treated as such to let different styles of climbers shine (like speed climbing does). - The men's routes were disproportionally harder than the women's. They either need to make the women's harder or the men's easier, which means probably somewhere in-between.
Yeah, actually, those of us who like Ai are just frustrated that she has to do the modern boulders, even though she hates them so much (remember how frustrated Ai looked on the first final boulder). I would love to see Ai competing only in lead. Actually, it would be great to have three medals for climbing in the Olympics: one for bouldering, one for lead, and one for the combination (for the most versatile climbers). That would be awesome and fair. While allowing climbers to focus more on their strengths, it would also not diminish the role of the most versatile climbers, who should be perceived as the best in modern sport climbing (like Janja).
I thought that how it was, Lead, Boulder and Combined (also speed ofc). Is there only combined and speed? Was my first time watching any sort of climbing (i loved it though) and I just assumed there were 4 events.
@@SuperYxskaft Yeah, I understand that it feels like there are four events happening in Olympic climbing (lead, bouldering, combined, and speed). But unfortunately, that's not the case. There were only two medals: one for bouldering + lead (combined) and one for speed. Firstly, it's a huge improvement that speed climbing was separated after Tokyo. Back in Tokyo, there was only one medal for climbing, which combined speed, bouldering, and lead. That was complete nonsense. In the current format, it's somewhat okay. The combined format (one medal for scores from bouldering + lead) exists in the World Cup, but in the World Cup, the disciplines also exist separately. So in some events, you can win a medal just for lead or just for bouldering. I hope for this separation. Sport climbing has changed drastically in the last 5-10 years, and bouldering and lead are now quite different disciplines, as shown by some very good athletes who excel only in bouldering or lead. So it would make sense to separate the disciplines by medals for the next Olympics. Offer one medal separately for lead, one for bouldering, one for speed, and one for the combined format. Actually the combined score and the last medal could be calculated based on the scores from the separate bouldering and lead events. There is no need to make a separate combined format. Currently, there is only a medal for the combined format (lead + bouldering) and one for speed. btw I would love to see lead climbing separated because that is true climbing. As Adam Ondra once said, bouldering is primarily about luck, if routsetters build boulders that suit you well.
@@pampuch65 For sure, I mean I dont know tbh what the difference is, but if it is as big as for example the difference in running 100m and 200m (and it seems to me bigger then that) for sure there should be 4 events. Maybe thats to many events though in a short time span, but using the method you suggested would fix that. That is actually how I thought it worked. Cant believe speed climbing was included last olympic with the others, that must have been super weird. As a sport continues to grow more and more specialisations will come along and it is only naturally to seperate the events abit (and still have left the combined imo) But as I said, I really loved watching it, that and the skateboard was two sports ive never watched at all that I really liked.
@SuperYxskaft Yeah, I feel the same. It’s such a beautiful sport, and I really enjoyed it too :-) I’m glad climbing made its way into the Olympics. And I dont want to be too negative.Let's say that the current format is okay and they have room for improvement :-)
To be fair, the difference in length between Mori and Raboutou is closer to 2 inches rather than one. Mori is 154 cm and Raboutou is 158 cm (1 inch = 2,54 cm). I dont knnow if that would make a difference, since I know very little about rock climbing, I just got this video in my feed, but i just thought to point out the more accurate height difference.
I'd usually say that Ai Mori could've done those dynos if her legs were just more powerful. And that's true for these olympics too. The thing is that even if it's possible, it's harder to do those things if you're short. It's perfectly fine to set boulders like this, as long as other boulders benefit shorter climbers mainly, which usually is what happens. However, this olympics every single boulder in the women's involved reachy dynos just to start. Even if Ai was taller, this setting harms anyone who isn't good at dynos. I generally push back against the idea that there are too many dynos in comps, because they're a real style of climbing. But you also have to include boulders that aren't super dynamic, to incorporate all different styles. Especially in the olympics, which happens so rarely, you want to show who's the best climber overall, not who's the best at one style.
8:18 I don't think that's entirely fair. An inch definitely makes a difference. An inch changes more then just physical height. It can have a big effect on arm length, body comp. An inch is absolutely significant.
8:15 the funny part is, if americans used a decent measuring system they would notice that 5'1 and 5'2 are so vague and wide that makes 1,54m and 1,58m seem the same when they are not 😂
I think there's a difference between boulders in gyms and boulders on competitions, and that is that competition boulders are for both the athlete AND audience. Bouldering competitions have steered from "traditional" strengthy moves into "parkourish" moves for a better audience experience. When you use start holds as "cruxy" moves for the competition boulder, it's not a good experience for neither the audience nor the athlete. There is definitely some legit criticism to bad route setting in this Olympics regardless.
I think climbing is always going to have this issue. Can't think of any other sports where competitors are at the mercy of the design of the arena itself.
Even Brook struggled to get off the ground on W2, but then flashed the rest of the boulder once she pulled on, leading to the points gap to Janja, who had no trouble pulling on. Let's admit it's neither fair, nor enjoyable spectating to see an athlete sitting on the mats unable to pull onto the starting holds.
> fair People have natural advantages in all sports. Changing the setting because there is a short athlete that wants to podium is ludicrous. Do we chip and glue outdoor boulders so that short people can climb them more easily?
@@AxelStenson Thing is, climber height is not a limiting or differentiating factor in climbing because you choose a route/holds that work for you... it involves as much problem-solving as athleticism. Someone who is shorter can find closer holds, or choose to approach a move differently to a taller climber... there are _options._ What made this arguably unfair (and definitely not enjoyable to watch) is that there was one option only - a starting hold that couldn't be reached any other way. That's not about natural advantage but rather _introduced disadvantage..._ athletes are supposed to be competing on an even playing field, not finding themselves disadvantaged by course design.
@@medea27 This is true at the recreational level of climbing, not so much at the (international) competitive level where there's usually an intended beta. I haven't seen many beta breaks or variation in methods in the olympic climbing rounds, neither for the men nor for the women. Then there's still a reason that we don't see only (or actually: barely any) very tall competitors at the highest level, such as e.g. in basketball or high jump. In climbing, shorter athletes can find it easier to keep body tension and generate explosive power, plus they are lighter which is also an advantage. That being said, these are general features, you can always set specific climbs to favour one body type over the other. Normally over the course of 4 boulders it should balance itself out, you just don't notice it as much if a climber struggles because they are too tall.
Shall we change the height of hurdles for shorter athletes? How about the weight of javelins for weaker athletes? Should we have peeps carrying the marathon runners who can't make it? No, just no.
While we are at it, let's base gymnastics scores on height as well, since being short is a massive advantage there. Oh and maybe stop basketball games in the middle of play to lower the rim for the shorter player who is about to shoot the ball. Sports are never fair. Height is just one variable. To be an elite athlete you will always need to have a certain base level of luck genetics wise. If you want to discriminate for height advantages or disadvantages you might as well start penalizing people for having higher natural testorone levels, or higher hematocrit levels. Elite sports are never fair. That is because it is impossible to determine precisely which genetic advantages an athlete has over another.
I am 5'5. i don't expect to be able to pull of the stuff Adam Ondra does as he is 8 inches taller than me with longer arms. It is a testament to Ms. Mori's skill that she can even compete in the first place being so short.
Ai is probably also 20-30 kilos lighter. The taller you get the worse your relative strength gets. While being tall can make reaching easier, you also lack strength making it more difficult. That's why there is both tall and short climbers. That's also why gymnasts are almost exclusively super short, because being tall doesn't bring an advantage, thus you just lack in relative strength if you're tall
@@koschei7687 Sure, but i either direction, after a certain point, the trade off becomes detrimental. After all, it doesn't matter how much easier you can hold yourself, if you literally can't reach the hold. Obviously it wasn't just her height, causing her issues in this situation. But let's not act like it wasn't at least an actual factor.
10:15 Hang on, did Magnus put on a pair of glasses and a new haircut, pretend he was someone else, and won himself an Olympic bronze medal? He might have pushed the joke a bit too far, this time.
Completely agree with the statement you made at the end. Look at how much better climbing was when they split off speed. Now just need to split bouldering and lead, will get to see far more specialists of both.
Dude that's another example of imperial unit sucking at their job. Ai mori: 5'1", Brooke is 5'2" so 1 inch. 1inch = 2.54cm. But look at the measurement in metrics: 1.54 vs 1.58cm! That's 4cm which is starting to be quite important
Probably another climber that should be considered in the height/muscle mass discussion is Jain Kim. According to her stats online, she’s 153cm. She is also more muscular than Ai is Like Ai, it’s a given how wonderful they are at lead and struggles a lot with dynamic movements. Jain has been sharing her trying to get better at the dynos by training parkour and doing more bouldering but it hasn’t quite worked out for her. She barely made semis/finals in the OQS cause she always makes up for it in lead. It is curious whether the 4cm gap with Brooke makes the difference because even Jain who openly shares her struggle and training with dynamic movements likewise perform poorly in recent boulder comps
Rather than comparing just height, people should look at height + ape index. Especially for those run and jump starts where they need to reach as high as possible and the compression one where if you have a bit more slack in terms of distance it is either to hold and move from that point. So body length + arm lenght does make a change. From what I can find (nothing really official), Brook has +2.5cm whereas Ai has +0cm. Of course, I don't think route setters are out to get Ai Mori, but the lack of variety in the starts of boulders is really lame and fails to show the various strength elite climbers should be able to display. So it is pretty stupid to call out any sort of bullying here, however I do think it is fair to expect much better from route setting at olympic level.
THANK you it’s not just about height clearly Brook has a different build (i.e. arm length/wingspan) than Ai. And like you said the setting was really biased towards a certain type of climbing.
This is what i was thinking when i saw the boulders in the video. Dyno dyno dyno dyno. Maybe they are not targeting Mori, but they sure as hell could have done a much better job. We are talking olympic setters here. Edit: Spelling.
@@TheBjornEman at this point you are just grasping at straws. It’s not about her being short, it’s about her being weak at generating power with her legs. She has other advantages over other climbers, but that’s clearly her weakness
@@megaxfull that’s the difference between lead and boulder, boulder has a lot more dynamic moves. You want just a 5 move lead climb? The point is to show off how versatile you are
Let me add something to that Brooke vs Ai argument. Brooke is also known to have short arms (158cm height, 156cm arm span), her arm span was mentioned in one of national comps in US. If you watch Japanese bouldering cup you can see the same situation with Ai struggling on dynamic boulders so she literally had this "bullying simulation" in her own country many times before. My humble guess would be that maybe Ai just doesn't have genetics for dynamic movement and would never shine in bouldering for that reason. I wouldn't think it's training methods because Japanese team is very serious about training and I am sure they know how to improve that problem - if it was possible. We should also notice that it's the same with many other sports. In gymnastics if you're tall, you will never be top level in gymnastic rings because of bad levers. In weightlifting you will never be on Lasha Talakha level if you're 170cm tall 70kg rat, Lasha is 197cm tall, big guy and with that frame he can go for those big weights, you small guy, you are not built for this. In swimming you cannot expect to be olympic athlete if you have short hands that cannot catch as much water as your tall friend's long arms. It's top level sport and in top level elite sport genetics matter. There is an obvious genetic difference between Brooke and Ai. Brooke seems to be way better at jumping far, but Ai seems to have way better endurance than Brooke. In next olympics bouldering and lead are supposed to be separate disciplines. This will be the time to show real Ai's genetic potential - the one she has for lead. This also puts in perspective how crazy genetics Janja has that she can win both lead and bouldering on international level.
Agreed. I don't think Ai Mori will ever be hugely competitive at bouldering. She would know what to do but her body doesn't naturally do it. In one of the boulders she jumps and instead of traveling up she goes out into space. It's not just strength. Brooke struggles with lead. She obviously she is one of the greatest but you can see that she has to climb aggressively and as efficiently as possible to do well. Her precision, balance, problem solving and conservation of energy aren't on the same as Ai Mori. When comfortable she actually double clips. When she's not in the flow she struggles to hold movement.
Ai Mori is 154cm, Brooke Raboutou is 158cm. I would say that's a pretty significant height difference, so I don't think you using Raboutou's height is a valid argument against people angry over Ai's situation. Although I don't think people should be angry over that, different athletes having physical advantages and disavantages isn't anything new and is part of the game but you gotta feel bad for a clearly talented athlete failing because of something they can't control
I see both points here, when a route is only dinos is kinda does become like parkour. To me tho this seems like the route setters went "more stretch = more hard!" And just decided that they'd compensate for lack of creative and good route setting by making everything further away
i agree with you even though i think making all the boulders in the finals dinamic is kinda stupid, i assume they are trying to appeal to people who are not into climbing since the moves are more flashy. In the end it doesnt matter Mori is still the lead goat
I absolutely adore Ai's lead style -- so effortless and beautiful. But let's face it -- she can't dyno properly. It's as if she was learning to dyno from scratch every time she came out (and when she does get the move, she tends to stick it, so it's not the height issue). I believe (and hope) if they separate b and l, she will happily compete in lead only and will crush it.
true, and the point people make here is that this is climbing, not dyno or parkour, it should at least be balanced, if not in favour of less dynos and more static like traditional climbing…
As unfortunate as it is, a person's physical traits are a major factor in how well they perform at sports. A short basketball player would also struggle more than a tall one.
Id appreciate if not every boulder had some stupid dyno. Really boring to watch. I will play Horizon ZD if I want to see that, not climbing competition.
i watched the womens final with my grandparents and every time ai mori was climbing my grandparents kept saying over and over that it wasnt fair to her lol
I remember explaining to my wife how it was a shame that they didn't have separate medals for lead vs bolder, as Ai Mori is such a good lead climber. I do think the crux move in the mens lead could have been a bit higher, due to the way the points system works out with higher moves being worth more. Just makes an early fall even more punishing.... but in the end, that's just lead climbing. Hoping next Olympics gives us a separate lead and boulder comp. I honestly think it'd be fun to one day have lead, boulder, and combined all as competitions, because it was fun seeing people who normally were lead / boulder specialists work to improve their skills in their weaker discipline throughout the last few years leading up to Paris.
Ai is massively disadvantaged by her height, but so is Brooke (lol... just reached the point where you pointed that out:) I was doing a hot take as I was watching the video) I remember comps where the likes of Janja just reached out to a hold, while Brooke was doing some ridiculous upside down cowgirl moves on a volume and topped the route despite the disadvantage. and the moral of the story: each climbing discipline needs to be its own thing in Olympic games. With boulder gravitating more and more towards parkour, climbers who shine in lead like Ai are put at a disadvantage.
For me Ai Mori is the Olympic Lead Champion. I don't accept Swimming getting 35 events of which most of them are almost the same with similar winners. While Rock Climbing only gets 4 events. 12 of the top 15 Medallists in Paris 2024 are Swimmers winning 4 to 6 medals each!
First of all....A+ editing and analysis. I actually liked the setting of all events with a slight exception being the finals "anti-small" boulder (slight not ZOMG shitstorm level). I'm totally fine with a boulder that's really hard for a shorter climber as long as it's doable in theory which this one was (as shown by Brooke). My only issue here is that you shouldn't make boulders that are particularly hard for a certain body type "gimmes" that everyone else is going to top (everyone but Ai and Seo topped this fairly easily). I also wouldn't mind some small box boulders where smaller athletes have a slight edge but these seem pretty rare. I do get really furious at gym boulders that are obviously set by fairly tall setters where smaller people have absolutely 0 chance of ever getting there (unless they are like 5 levels over the grading of said boulder and ultra dynamic).
Olympic climbing should have 4 events with medals in all - Speed - Lead - Boulder - Combined (speed, lead, and boulder as in last olympic, or just lead and boulder as in this olympic) This would mirror the track and field with the individual events and the decathlon, and promote athletes who specialize and generalize. Would the combined event be more prestigious? Perhaps, but you would also see a different rooster of athletes who are amazing at one thing but not great at all three (or two).
YES! I think combined should only be lead and boulder, because let's face it, speed is something completely different. But lead and boulder complement each other. And I think you should have endurance and wits to be good rock climber.
No, it is competition climbing. I am a dinosaur from the time when climbers were against commercialization, and competitions. I don't ever remember seeing anything called acrobatics that looked like this. On key aspect of climbing is the lousy contact point.
I know nothing about rock climbing (besides trying it when i was a kid), but i known physics, mechanics, basic math... of course 1 inch makes a difference! If i need to reach something that is 1 inch more than my height+arm+feet length, which would be max height available to me without jumping (can't jump, i'm disabled), and someone who is "only" 1 inch taller can reach it... Now adding the jump, there is an optimal reach that i could get, based on how strong my muscles needed for the jump are, plus anatomy and... length. Length matters statically to reach something, but even more dynamically, it affects how much further one's able to project themselves (physical strength plus surface applying the force), as well as aerodynamics to get additional propulsion in the air. Do you generate more or less wind if you use a smaller fan? Anyway.. no, myth NOT busted, not when you're pointing out what could very well be the crucial difference. I'm not saying that if the rocks where closer (to compensate for her smaller body+arm length), she would do it, but it's likely. Either way, it's THE argument that matters, length is a disadvantage, whatever the number. If her fingers were 2mm (back to international units, i'm done with the funny units :P) away from the boulder, and another athlete had that length available to her, it doesn't matter if it's a small or a big difference, it's just out of her reach. Including how much someone her size is able to project themselves.
And that is blisteringly obvious, so probably not what people are talking about. The question might be closer to the idea she didn't reach it, but that does not mean a person of her height/dimensions could not reach it. She just specializes her training to suck. But take the person who does reach it, does that person have a disadvantage where lead climbing is concerned? The moment one combines the two disciplines it should not be expected that the world leader in one of them will win the overall. And it is irrelevant whether the point of failure is low or high on the route, though it will strike people as weird if it is always one of the other.
@HondoTrailside But again, there's a good chance that the distance is simply out of her reach, and not about skill. My point is that we don't know, it's just seems likely if there was no one her height or smaller able to reach. I see it as the default explanation, to be checked or proved wrong... So stating that someone of her height/length is unable to reach it might not be true, but there's also no proof otherwise. The only data here is that 1. she is the smallest, 2. couldn't reach, and 3. was a champion in the past (so she's good). It's not proof, but it's enough reason to get it thoroughly studied to fix this in future Olympics imo. So to me her case is a good reason to start an investigation, which they might do behind the scenes anyway... I hope...
I think Ai Mori has so much of a "little girl" give about her that she naturally invokes protection reflexes from many people. I sure know I've found myself going there. But: she's such an absolute beast on the lead wall, she made it to the Olympic finals even though her boulder performance was (way better than anything I could ever do but) not quite up to the standards the women have been seeing the last few years. I do want to note though: one inch (actually one and a half if I saw the metric numbers correctly) can be an absolute pain of a difference when you have to overextend yourself and hold yourself on the wall with a shitload of core tension. So at least semi boulder 1 did look like it was just not physically possible for Ai. Is that unfair? I would advocate no. It's a credit to Ai and how insanely good she is that she made the Olympic finals despite this pretty limiting factor she just has - and on the Japanese team of all, they've got to have the most stacked roster in the world. If she'd never been at the Olympics because the qualifying events had been more selective for height, nobody would have batted an eye about it.
Finally, someone is bringing up the semi! Many people complain about WB1 in the final, but I found WB1 in the semifinal to be worse. I took screenshots to compare Brooke and Ai on the starting hold. Brooke could slightly bend her knees for the jump, but Ai was almost in full stretch. 1-2 inches made a difference here. You could have trained to jump higher from the pad, but to jump from a stretch position is a totally different story. My issue with WB1 in the final is that the rest of the problem seemed too easy, making it almost a 0 or 25-point situation. It didn’t do much to separate the other athletes. That said, I don't think it's problematic to test jumping skills. WB4 in the final is a good example: Ai struggled with jumping to the HZ, but Brooke got it, while some taller athletes didn’t, showing that it’s not all about height. I still think the setting was excellent overall, but I hope this kind of discussion isn’t limited to either conspiracy theories or ‘just train legs.’
I am still hoping for varied routes in the next Olympics (at least in the women’s category). Dynamic movement isn’t the only thing that makes things in climbing difficult and it very much favors tall climbers. One inch can make a difference in climbing. I would argue that most of the dynos were able to be done regardless of height except the first. It was painful to watch Ai attempt it. She could barely reach the start hold which didn’t allow her to jump and because it was the start there was no way to work around it. That inch is really 1.5 inches different in that case (assuming neutral ape index). It doesn’t sound like a lot until you are at the very edge of tolerance. I don’t think it was done on purpose… I think it was just poor planning/route setting. And perhaps this is a bit sexist but they should definitely have more than one female route setter in the next Olympics. I have found that female route setters, in general, tend to focus on unique movements or out of the box thinking rather than large dynos. In general female climbers tend to rely of flexibility more and when that gets incorporated it can make for a really cool and interesting route. It is harder (not impossible) for male route setters to think of those moves because they are less likely to be able to do them/use them regularly. The lack of through about flexibility was shown a number of times in bouldering portion of the women’s comp. The beta from the route setters was significantly harder than what was done on several routes because they didn’t think about high feet or weird heel hooks.
When I was watching the woman’s final, they were SO WHOLESOME. Even when it meant they lost a position they were cheering each other on, genuinely upset when somebody fell. The audience really needs to take a clue from the competitors on how to react.
Ai Mori was incredibly fun to watch during her performance on the Lead Final. Honestly if she had a bit more strength for the Boulder competition she would have been vying for a medal.
Dunno about non-german commentary, but german tv had Dicki Korb, one of Megos' coaches, as co-commentary and he really bullied the shit out of Ai Mori and Laura Rogora for being too weak, too skinny and thus unpleasant to watch and overall childish looking.
Absolute bs. They mentioned the obvious about Rogora, yes but "bullied the shit out"... come on... he also said its personal preference seeing muscular/powerfull athletes, wich is totally understandable. Dont be such a snowflake.
@@deem92as a TV commentator, don't intersect your personal preferences on how other athletes look I understand that you Germans are still a bit dog-like even so long after getting your arses handed to you, but there is still a lot to work on I see
God, I was wondering if I was the only one bothered by it. I remember that he even said that he thinks more muscular female athletes look hotter. I genuinely hated the Dicki Korb's commentary - it was so bad that I even sent an email to the broadcaster, where I complained about it, which is something I have never done before. Unfortunately I never received a reply.
that's rubbish mate. he didn't bully anyone, and he didn't talk about anyone being too childish looking. obviously. he did unapologetically complain about the the issues the sport has with eating disorders, of which Rogora is the obvious prime example.
Rabotou also has substantially more well built leg muscles, while Ai literally has twig legs. She lost because she failed to train a certain portion of her sport, no other reason, period.
Well said. Also, Ai said something like that she doesnt like Dynos and not training them as hard. So, no one else really to blame here if she doesnt perform well on dynos. Brooke on the other hand was on fire and had the silver well earned!
Massive L take. 1. yes, 1 inch is a big difference. together with a similar difference in arm length, that's 2 inches or 5cm. When you can just about reach the start hold but not quite well enough to hold it, that can easily be the difference between getting onto the boulder or not. 2. This is climbing. Not acrobatics or high-jump. Dynamic moves in the middle of the boulder, sure. She's proven more than once that she can statically do long dynos on sketchy slabs. But "high jump off of a soft mat" is not an interesting criterion in an olympic climbing final. Utter failure by the setters to set a set of problems that meaningfully tests the *climbing* skills of all the athletes. Jumping off of a soft mat is not a climbing skill. Shameful imo.
I loved the Olympics so no shade on the route setters but: Brooke wouldn't loose as many points for attempts on the high boulders, she was struggling too.. And... Ai Mori CAN (or could) jump! The spiderwoman JUMPED a massive dyno in a competition somewhere around 2020... What you doing girl 😭😭😭 The whole of Slovenia had massive love for both Brooke and Ai during the Olympics haha even nonclimbers had massive respect for both 🫶
I think it worth a mention that the move out of the low zone on Boulder 3 in the womens final was favouring the shorter climbers, only Ai, Brooke and the insanly strong Janja could do that, and they all topped after that. height can be an advantage a lot of times, but a disadvantage at others.
It's good when they set the routes so that height is sometimes an advantage, and sometimes a disadvantage. That's part of what we love the sport, it's so versatile and different people can go about the problems in different ways depending on their body types and abilities. I think the "controversy" here is how many of the women's problems favored height, it was unbalanced. Personally I'm not too offended tbh, if Ai Mori compensated by being great at dynos like Brooke, she could make it work. (Not to criticize her or anything, every climber has their strong and weak points and she obviously specializes in lead.) The only part that bothered me was when she couldn't even get to the start. That's just kind of sad to watch ^^'
Do these twitter users expect the olympics to have a seperate wall for every single athlete tailor made to their exact heights? Do they really think things scale perfectly like that? Three words: square-cube law. Someone that is twice as tall will not simply be twice as heavy or twice as strong. That isn't how that works. General rule of thumb for body building is that every time you increase your entire muscle mass by 50% (i.e. you go from 30kg to 45kg muscle), you double your measurable strength...
I understand that Brooke is nearly same height as Ai Mori, but does anyone know if they have a significant difference in arm span? I feel that was a much larger factor than height in many of the problems I saw Ai Mori struggle in
I can't believe I'm going to say this, but thank you for your voice of reason. Ai Mori needs train jumping. But she probably doesn't want to build extra muscle weight. She's so tiny and light (and strong, especially her fingers/forearms) lead is quite easy for her.
He said "We finally get to see rock climbing truly represented on an Olympic stage." And then we are shown video of people climbing on a completely artificial climbing wall with no rocks whatsoever.
Thanks for bringing up the Static vs Dyno notes. Pretty much all I've heard and seen about Ai Mori is how she excels at exceptionally difficult static moves -- even when other competitors solved it with a dyno. In this case, there were just moves she couldn't solve statically and her dynos haven't improved significantly in the last year. I love watching her climb but at the end of the day, she just wasn't prepared for these problems.
Nice point of view and agreed! And I am just shamelessly parroting Matt and Shauna here, but as long as the lead climb is fucking hard as well, all is nicely balanced out. I thought it was spectacular and good drama. Climbers know to expect the unexpected.
