Results | Nanjing Bouldering World Cup 2017

Keita Watabe and Shauna Coxsey have won the Nanjing Bouldering World Cup. Tomoa Narasaki, Janja Garnbret, Jernej Kruder and Miho Nonaka completed the podium.

Another evening of success for Japan. 3 medals, one of each color. This is Keita Watabe’s first victory in an IFSC World Cup.

The route setting was really good but the final had a lot of technical incidents. Including issues with the clocks and an invalid top of W1 by Miho Nonaka (she matched on the volume and not on the top, just like Jongwon Chon did last week in Chongqing).

Full results: men & women

Una publicación compartida de IFSC (@ifsclimbing) el

Una publicación compartida de IFSC (@ifsclimbing) el

Una publicación compartida de IFSC (@ifsclimbing) el

Spread the word!

    Comments

    1. > … an invalid top of W1 by Miho Nonaka (she matched on the volume and not on the top, just like Jongwon Chon did last week in Chongqing).
      As predicted ;)
      Strictly speaking also Shauna and Janja in the same problem didn’t match the top *hold*, but ‘only’ their own fingers of the other hand
      https://youtu.be/FELZjePLH38?t=2385
      https://youtu.be/FELZjePLH38?t=3026
      And in M2, the only toppers (Kruder and Watabe) match the volume near the top hold, not the hold itself
      https://youtu.be/FELZjePLH38?t=3981

      • >Strictly speaking also Shauna and Janja in the same problem didn’t match the top *hold*, but ‘only’ their own fingers of the other hand
        Ok ok…

        But hey, this time they were warned about that top. And she still didn’t match properly. So I’m gonna blame her again and the “heat of the moment” thing, either that or she has some serious memory problems. And if it happens again in Tokyo then I’m gonna be even more confident in blaming any climber who doesn’t match properly.

        • Angel, weren’t it’s you who suggested judges should judge strictly to the rules? ;)
          Then not only the most obvious case (Miho), but also all other 4 cases I mentioned above, they should NOT be awarded top.
          I’m not suggesting they don’t deserve the tops — for me (as a climber) they have reached the top in a usual (outdoors) sense.
          What I’m suggesting, there must be some changes in route setting and/or rules to prevent similar situations in the future. I believe nobody (climbers, audience) is happy with what happened to Miho (or last weekend to others and probably many more in the future). It’s a plus they warned them now (and I understand you have additional reason for blaming climbers;), but if he have good rules/’normal’ tops, there would be no need for such warnings.

      • KGlowka says:

        Hey. It seems you are wrong in the Shauna & Janja and M2 cases.
        The rules says you have to control top hold with two hands. That includes putting two hands one on another on their top hold. There’s nothing in the rules about the need to match or touch the top hold in order to fully control it.
        On M2 the whole structure with additional feature (screw hold) was marked as the top hold. Controlling any part of the structure with two hands means a proper top.

        • Bojan says:

          KGlowka, yes, of course you are right about M2, sorry, my bad.
          But I don’t agree about W1. ‘Controlling a hold’ means you are holding (with a hand) a *hold* (not any part of your body, i.e. fingers it this case) in a controlled (stable) position. The name ‘hold’ (top hold, bonus hold…) itself implies you must *hold* it — and according to the rules only holds controlled by your *hands* are considered for scoring.

          • The rules say “control the marked finishing hold of the Boulder with both hands”. So nothing about touching the hold. Since the start of IFSC bouldering competitions grabbing a small hold with one hand and putting the other hand on top of the first has been considered a valid way of controlling a top. Miho matched incorrectly, Shauna and Janja matched correctly. Miho and the Japanese team seem to agree since they didn’t appeal. And changing the rules to prevent matching with a hand on top of another would create unnecessary confusion and even more problem (because then tiny tops would be a nightmare to judge).

            • Bojan says:

              >grabbing a small hold with one hand and putting the other hand on top of the first has been considered a valid way of controlling a top
              There is nothing about that in the official rules. It may just be some internal agreement between the judges. And for me it’s absurd. ‘Controlling’ a hold for me is equal to ‘holding a hold with your hand’ (in a stable position). And ‘with both hands’ means holding it with both hands, not just one.
              Of course, someone may introduce some odd ‘rules’, that are not written in official code. But I don’t see this a smart decision – rules must be clear and known (published in written) to everyone.

              >And changing the rules to prevent matching with a hand on top of another would create unnecessary confusion and even more problem (because then tiny tops would be a nightmare to judge).
              I’m not proposing a rule *change* here. Just introducing some common sense, i.e. avoiding those micro holds at the top. Except for balance problems top, where you can easily touch even the smallest hold with both hands — as in W2:
              https://youtu.be/FELZjePLH38?t=4063

            • >There is nothing about that in the official rules. It may just be some internal agreement between the judges.
              That’s the way everyone involved has interpreted what “controlling” means. You have your own definition, which involves touching the hold with both hands. That’s a different interpretation. Neither is explicitly in the rules. But one has been used for years. Yours would be a change. And I don’t see a good reason to change the interpretation. I don’t see the current one as problematic (not less than the new one would be).

    Speak Your Mind

    *