Discussion: Release 104: New Ticking Interface

Release 104: New Ticking Interface

With this release we make the new ticking interface the default ticking flow for all users. Enjoy an improved interface that allows you to choose from the greatest selection of tick types on the web, allows for gear style changes for your ascents and for you to record ascent parameters such as knee pads, pre-clipped protection or ecopoint.

We have also improved presentation of relevant guidebooks for each area and fixed several minor issues - see our Github Pulse.

If you like theCrag, please consider becoming a supporter!

Hi thanks for the release Simon! Few questions and concerns, how long do you plan to support the old ticking interface? And, could we see an option to log all selected routes in a single page rather than a paginated modal?

I find a lot of value in being able to edit all logs on single page, as I often try to keep them uniform and want to edit all comments before submitting the ticks.

The new flow also doesn't let you skip a route if you selected it by accident, pressing cancel instead closes the dialogue. This feels like a UX flaw to me.

Whilst the UI looks and performs a lot better, I'd much rather log in a single transaction (like the old single page system) and be confident in what my logs will look like once I click submit.

We will keep the old flow on for a while but really it will not be supported from now so you will not get access to new features. Skipping is something we did not get in our analysis. Maybe we could do something in the new flow for that

I fully agree with Jarred Vardy. Single page overview logging all the way. And please drop the emojis, this has been requested often enough …

Gentlemen, owners of the Crag, I appreciated your website. The combination of a climbing diary and guides, topos by area is great. However, the last update, the logging of routes is very unpractical.

1) it is not possible to choose a classification scale when logging a route. Now the scale is given. I am certainly not the only one who uses 1, 2 or 3 scales at most - for my own clarity. Furthermore, and this is no less important, there are countries such as Spain, where the old and new French scale are combined for sport routes, in some areas only old or new. Also sometimes, in Spain they are using only technical grade A0, A1 ... Complete confusion occurs, for example, in Sweden, Norway, where trad and sport paths are combined. In Scandinavia NWG, SWG, new Fr and sometimes UIAA are used (not only). In Czech, we are using, too many scales and believed me, often looks as UIAA but it is not UIAA. Please, PLEASE return immediately the choice of any classification scale, as it was until now.

2) I don't understand the addition of "suggested grade" at all. Assigned grade is clear all, the editor can change it. And then it is the user's grade, that is the expression of the user's opinion. According to my observation, most users just write the route and not given own grade. But a certain part of us using our own classification. And I would like really just see my grade in diary. I really didn't understand the meaning of suggested grade?

3) emoti - damn why? stars was perfectly fine and readable. Did you try to read emoti on your smartphone outdoor?

Generally, please return back old ascent log.

Since I'm complaining here, I would personally welcome the application of a slash for personal expression of grade i.e. 6c/6c+ Fr or 7+/8- UIAA etc.

And the last, important point. It doesn't apply to reales: please, it really looks quite strange in the heading grade with TR or A.F. styles. And in notable ascent styles TR, A.F. Hang Dog ... are also oddities. In the modern European and worldwide sports concept, only OS, flash, RP, PP, very rarely A.F. is valid. Other "styles" are expressions of climbing failure and incompetence. For USA purposes, etc., one push style and other valuable big wall styles can of course be applied. I feel bad when in "notable ascent" I see 7+ or 9 etc. in "style" as tick, TR, AF, when the 7- or 8+ OS style has real value and is worth listing in notable ascent. Following the example of competing websites, I would suggest registering TOP 10, where only valuable styles would be evaluated.

Thank you and sorry for novel above

As a software developer myself, I would like to say that it's near to impossible to get everything the right way for all the users. And with the years I've learned that it's better to get something in the hands of the users so that feedback can start flowing. I appreciate the effort to improve. We don't want perfection; we want continuous improvement and that takes constant effort.

ElUri thanks for clarifying this for the community.

Petr Melichar Hi Petr

addressing the classification scale of an ascent: Also in the new UI this is still possible in almost the very same way as in the old. If you would like to use an alternate grading system for your ascents as the assigned grade then you can use the "grade override" option. The only different is that this is now not a drop down anymore where you can write in any grade. It should pick the right system depending on grade context and route style. if you would like to specify a grade system you can use textual prefixes like [UIAA / FR, SX ...]

- image-1668704453869.png

Afterwards it will show up in your logbook with the new grade (system). Here is a interactive widget where you can test the parsing of a grade input:

https://www.thecrag.com/en/article/gradesonthecrag#try-it-yourself

The Difficulty feedback is meant to give a feedback for the primary registered grade of each route and therefore is in the very same grade system. Is it a hard or soft one or would an downgrade be appropriate. In the long term you will see the grade feedback on the route page and so a grade change will be based on data not just one opinion. Here an example: https://www.thecrag.com/en/climbing/switzerland/alpen/berner-oberland/route/4670077770#difficulty-6b+

>This will set the grade of the ascent to your feedback but will not change the route grade on the fly

Nicky What do you mean by this? As far as I can tell, the feedback is just a feedback. The grade of the ascent is not changed by the feedback, is it?

Here is an example of two ascents of two routes with the same grade but different feedback. In both cases, the awarded points are the same, which implies that the ascent grade is also the same.

- image-1668705108450.png

Dominik you are right as usual i corrected the false statement. thx for the feedback

Nicky Okay. I understand, just "suggested" seems like a corporate creation of unnecessary reports. Now the user has the option of a personal rating (it remains in the drop-down menu). But what is the point of a suggestion when there is (above mentioned and akready used) personal evaluation? By implication; what validity will the suggestion grade have in these examples: 1) assigned 6c+, suggestion 6a, personal grade unchanged (the user leaves it at 6c+). 2) assigned 6c+, suggestion unchanged i.e. 6c+, personal grade 7 UIAA? In addition, I don't want to deal with researching 20 classification systems or their table conversions, local specification ... so I will probably skip the suggestion. Personally, I am grateful for the already existing GrIA, from my experience it works well (if there is enough data) And I can see how comes to GrIA that enough users use a clip stick, do not understand the style (OS, flash, RP ..), hunting numbers/points in Kalymnos-type areas or just outright cheats.

I need an option to disable the emojis in the stream. It's too much fir the already cluttered UI.

First, thanks for all your efforts to make such an awesome site. I use it every time I climb outdoors. As a software engineer, myself, I know the effort required to create and support such sites.

Unfortunately, this latest release with its new ticking interface is highly problematic for me. Actually, it is literally unusable.

I use a smaller screen phone (iPhone SE 1st gen, with Safari), and the layout of the ticking interface is unusable because the “Log Ascent” button is simply not available/visible. I am unable to submit my ascents as a result.

Neither portrait nor landscape orientation of the phone provide enough of the ticking interface for me to see/use the “Log Ascent” button. I scroll the ticking interface as much as is possible, but the last thing rendered on the screen is the “Show advanced fields” checkbox.

Here is an example screenshot in portrait layout. I have scrolled the ticking interface down as far as possible. You will note that the “Log Ascent” button is not available.

- image-1668857497187.png

Let me know if you need any more information or assistance in sorting out this UI issue. I’m a full stack software engineer, so can handle more technical requests for information. And thanks again for all the great work.

Martin Monteiro-Haig that does not sound so good. Are you able to use our GitHub in case there is a lot of follow up required.

In the meantime have you worked out how to use the old tick interface?

So now there's no way to distinguish between a top-rope onsight and a lead onsight? One of these is lead and one is TR:

https://image.thecrag.com/504x119/f1/49/f1497e4e9f2b4a3fc71277699b0e899b07380542

Jonathan Bright what is the url for where the image was taken from. One of them should say top rope.

Jonathan Bright See also https://github.com/theCrag/website/issues/4127

Simon: https://www.thecrag.com/ascents/by/jonathanbright https://www.thecrag.com/ascent/6851390964 https://www.thecrag.com/ascent/6851392332

Ahh, we are probably using the route gear style in that table. It should now be the ascent gear style. Thanks for reporting.

Simon Dale, I have opened issue #4143 - New tick flow - "Log Ascent" button not visible on small screen device on GitHub.

I trust that I have opened the issue in the correct place.

And, yes, thanks, I can see now where I can open the Old log ascent UI.

Simon Dale Oh wow, didn't expect a global change so quickly. So they weren't even planned to be there? Looks so much better like it is now. Two different "visuals", as in stars and emojis for the same "metric" (quality), was confusing to me.

Simon Dale, apologies, I only just saw your last comment to me just now.

Okay, I cleared the website data for thecrag.com (i.e. cookies and cache), logged back in, and then attempted to log an ascent using the new ticking UI.

The problem is still there. The Safari browser navigation controls, which expand/collapse dynamically, still hide the Cancel and Log ascent buttons at the bottom of the modal dialog (I have provided more details about this peculiarity with mobile Safari in issue #4143 that I mentioned above).

Martin Monteiro-Haig I don't have iphone and chrome iphone emulation is fine so it is difficult for me to be sure I have fixed it. I think your git issue will be helpful. I will add comments in there when I get to it again.

Simon Dale, sounds good. Let me know if/when you need me to test a solution.

With the addition of "Second" as a style rather than a type, this seems to mean that these aren't going to play with older style logs. See screenshot below.

- image-1669163762184.png

Also, just adding my preference for a single page logging layout option.

What was the rationale for making second/top rope a style and not leaving it how it was?

It's split our logbooks in half with backwards incompatibility and made it hard to discern whether something was on lead or not in the feeds. Especially since the flash symbol still has the redpoint icon behind it despite being on second. Also, having to go to the route or ascent page to see the route's real style is cumbersome.

This has been a really confusing change.

Yesterday I did the same route 5 times for fitness laps. Each was a redpoint, but because of the clunky system I had to make 5 separate logs. This is unnecessarily cumbersome. I much preferred the old system.

You can keep using the old system for a while, but we we are moving forward with the new system. Happy to keep discussing ideas to improve the workflow.

I've logged my age-old comment which I'm referring to in each release discussion as a github issue now: https://github.com/theCrag/website/issues/4144

David Jefferson I also added a paragraph to address your issue there.

I had a similar issue to David Jefferson.

I wanted to log multiple attempts for a route that I am projecting, and add individual notes for each attempt.

While I could indicate the number of tries, I was surprised and a little frustrated that I could not add per-shot comments.

I chose to switch back to the old UI to annotate and log my multiple attempts in one submission, instead of doing multiple submissions using the new UI.

Have added my thumbs up and a comment to Christoph Rauch's, GitHub issue (#4144).

Furthermore, when projecting a route, the number of attempts approach in the new UI presents a problem: what if I had tries with different tick types? I could perhaps start with a top-rope tick, then have a failed lead attempt tick, then a hang dog tick, and then maybe something like a pink point or red point.

Unless I am missing something, I don't see how the new UI allows for a mix of different tick types for shots for the same route.

The new UI allows for different tick types. It is just that you have to do it in a separate flow.

If we implement the clone shot flow improvement mentioned in the git hub issue then you will be able to do it in one flow.

If you have anything new in regards to issue #4144 then please add it there. Sometimes it can be a while before we complete work and there is no way we will be able to cross reference all discussions.

Sure, no worries, Simon Dale. Comment added to #4144.

I noticed the following incoherences in the new ticking interface.

1. under sport tab : is the mention "lead" for "lead solo" required (if you climb solo I guess you're not "leading" any party, right ?);

2. under second/top rope tabs : how can you perform onsight (without beta that is) after having belayed and thus seen your fellow climber leading ?

3. under free solo tab : what is a free solo "attempt" ? Did you free solo up to a certain point, then fell and died and went back home ?

4. under aid tab : how can you possibly climb onsight or flash in an aided ascent (considering onsight and flash are aidfree) ?

I also noticed the "aid" tag is no longer available under either of the sport/second/toprope tabs while this feature was useful as it sometimes is the starting point of your next project (from top rope with aid towards red point).

Serge Longueville

1. google or youtube: lead climbing solo with grigri or soloist

2. some chains are accessible from above or from a side route. Of course, top rope is not a notable ascent. Should be just mark as TR without any add.

3. you can retreat (from some bolt, nut ..) and it is atempt or retreat ...

4. some climbs are (historicaly) combination of free and aid climbing i.e. Yosemit, Czech/German sandstone, some alpine multipitches etc.

Petr Melichar Thx for 1), 2) and 3). Not convinced about 4) Either you rest on a ring and it's A.F. (in Elbsandstein and similar places), either you send the route and it's onsight/flash/RP/PP. People who claim FFAs in Yosemite understand them as aidfree from bottom to top, right ? Otherwise they would deceive themselves and the community.

Serge Longueville

1. There are some alpine routes graded i.e. 6c+, M6, A0 https://www.emontana.cz/ondro-huserka-rozhovor/ or 7+, A3+ or ED2, A1,VI/6, 90° https://festivalalpinismu.cz/osobnosti/marek-holecek The grading system is sometimes not easy and the alpine, bigwall routes are sometimes beyond TheCrag grading horizon 😉 I think if you keep the style of alpine routes(not only above mantioned) it could be OS, flash ...

Alpine multipitches ascents

Well, I am old school. We distinguish two types of mountain ascent

1. you lead each length and as the leader you must keep one style. Follower can sit, rest, jumar, A0, A1, fly, ...

2. You and the other climber take turns in the lead = if you climb one length as leader, you climb TR the next, etc., etc. Each leader must keep one, united style for both. Each follower must climbed clean, no-rest. Of course if the some spot is officially A3, you can use aid climbing in this spot without impact on style. As a note is used "team". But if one of the leaders or the follower falls, sits, jumar, it spoils the output value of both. These two types of ascent are valuable.

Serge Longueville can you provide a link to an ascent with the CPR issue. I thought we had resolved this, but we may not have.

Simon Dale The climb I refer to can be seen in my records on May 22 1998. I climbed the last pitch of Pilier des Fourmis in Buoux. My ascent is logged as flash second but translates into genuine lead flash. I was surprised that CPR got such a boost and simulated different types of ascents for the same pitch hence realized this was given the same CPR as a true flash lead. Flash toprope looks OK (had such a climb, same day, same grade but different route - « Elvis cartonne »). If you need the log number, let me know.

Serge Longueville please send the link to your ascent.

http://www.thecrag.com/ascent/6944020914

I have no idea why this is not working. I just replicated the ascent in a dev system and it was fine.

This will take some investigation but honestly I just do not have time right now. Let's monitor this for a while and see who else has the problem and try and work out a pattern.

I think I may have found the issue. In a multipitch, the ascent type of any individual pitch is logged as a comment and is therefore disregarded for CPR and defaulted to a lead ascent whether climbed as second or toprope.

When you log an ascent with pitches then this is structured data on the ascent. There is code which traverses the ascent pitch structured data to work out the CPR.

You are correct when yo say that on a route there is no structured pitch data, but rather it is worked out from comments and from grade contributions.

This means that there is no registered pitch data for CPR.

I made the same ascent log in one of our development system and it worked as expected. For some reason it did not work as expected in production with your ascent.

But this is just the nature of a complex system with ever changing requirements. We somehow have to struggle through...

Ok don’t want to take too much of your time on this. Thx for the effort unless someone else complains about overstated CPR 25 years back🙂.

Why does this ascent (and others like it) say "Climbed gear style Unknown" yet the tick type is "Top rope onsight"?

https://www.thecrag.com/ascent/6155972751

Is that because it was logged with the old ticking interface and the climbed gear style didn't inherit "top rope" from the old tick style?

If you tick with the old tick flow it does not complete all the tick fields. We will not be fixing this.

So all my ticks from before the new flow was introduced will not have the correct climbed gear style?

They just assume the route climb style. We plan to migrate at some point in the future

I'm still confused. If I try to filter my logbook, checking only lead ascents under Ascent filters, and checking only Trad under Route filters, it shows top rope ascents like this:

https://www.thecrag.com/ascent/6792344697

https://www.thecrag.com/ascent/6792164748

https://www.thecrag.com/ascent/6574964493

https://www.thecrag.com/ascents/with-tick-type/on+lead+onsight+flash+redpoint+pinkpoint+groundupredpoint+greenpointonsight+greenpointflash+greenpoint+allfreewithrest+dog+leadsolo/with-route-gear-style/trad/by/jonathanbright/?sortby=when-climbed,desc

Just climb

The filter that was used was in route gear style. You probably want ascent gear style

But I checked only lead ascents under "tick type"

Sure it is going to take a while for all our changes to filter through fully.

So since now the old interface is disabled, i am no longer able to log a route with the grade i think it should have?

I do not mind if you take my logged grade as a route grade suggestion or not, but please let me log the route (for myself) with-whatever great i feel is reasonable.

I now have the case, that a route is quite contrived. If you stick to the way its "intended" the grade stands. However, the way i climbed it its a grade less (at least in my opinion). Now I am only able to give a grade suggestion for the route (which is not even good, as the general grade is not wrong), but not actually log it with the lower grade. Thats def a step back!

When I log multiple ascents, new ticking interface is a backsliding. For instance if I climbed 30 boulders problems in a day, I need to log them individually (which is tedious) and not in a whole like before.