What do boulderers have that rope climbers don't? Why did we choose bouldering instead of rope climbing?
Well, I thought long and hard and came up with a few reasons.
1. Boulderers tend to be a little more on the reckless side. By this I only mean that we'd be more likely to pull a Leeroy Jenkins. Rope climbers are a little more...calculated in their game. I mean, come on, let's face it: we're comparing people who would climb 20 feet only with rope to people who would climb 20 feet without it. In fact, us boulderers would probably not climb that 20 foot problem with rope, given the choice. Where's the fun in that?
2. Rope is annoying. I don't know about you guys, but the last time I tried to lead, I was seriously spending more time trying to clip the damn rope into the bolts than I was actually climbing. OK so maybe I'm just incompetent, but that shit was still annoying. And top roping is bad too - it totally gets in the way.
3. Gear is annoying. I don't want to carry stuff around. I don't like checking in at airports. With bouldering, depending on where you're going, you may not even need a crash pad.
4. Gear is expensive. Rope, harnesses, rope bags, carabiners, ATCs, anchors = way more than a crash pad.
5. Dynos are cool. Bouldering is more explosive than rope climbing - I mean, take all your power and put it in 10 moves versus 100. The 10 moves are going to be a lot more intense, and be way more awesome. It's like sprinting versus long distance running. I'm sorry but the 100 meter dash is just way more interesting than the 32 mile race. Don't you get bored after 100 meters anyway?
In the end, boulderers have the more awesome personality....because...they just do. Sure, rope climbing has its fun parts, but the climbers themselves are just...not boulderers. Ha this post makes no sense at all.