The Championnats d’Europe d’Escalade (climbing) in Villars-sur-Ollon has just finished. I couldn’t make it to all the events, but did see the finals of the “Speed” event. It’s a series of head-to-head elimination races up a 15m tall wall, resulting in an eventual victor after enough rounds. Speed climbing is a bit like skateboarding at the Olympics: absolutely in no way a real representation of what it’s like to do it for 99.99% of people who skate/climb, and apparently it’s scoffed at by most of the community; but it’s entertaining nonetheless to the layman, and brings spectators in so why not include it? I have a surface level knowledge of the competition, informed only by the fact that it has happened in the village for the last few years. I know that the route in speed climbing is always the same, to allow comparisons of timings across the years. There’s probably a number of other factors that can’t be controlled, like is the fact Villars is at 1,200m above sea level enough to make a difference? But anyway, they control the ones they can. The competition started and got through a number of rounds. There were some comments about how the climber on the left always won. I thought maybe the stronger (according to previous results?) climber was assigned the left lane. Maybe there’s some psychology there if you see the left climber always winning and then you’re up next, on the right? Nah, surely it’s just a coin toss? I was looking at the wall thinking it’s interesting that the route has been standardised since the inception, and I wondered if they’ve ever had an event happen with one side being subtly different to the other; such that it would (now?) invalidate the results, or they’d (at the time) have to fix it then restart the competition. Then I looked a bit harder and thought that something seemed off. It seemed off anyway as there was a banner running down the middle of the wall with sponsor logos and other such things on it, but this wasn’t perfectly centered. This gave the impression that the right lane was a little thinner than the left lane. Or was the banner actually perfectly centered and something else was off? One of the holds was giving the impression that the banner wasn’t centered because the hold wasn’t correctly placed with respect to its counterpart? I was convinced something was wrong so took a photo on my phone and then zoomed in to look closer. Yep. The fourth hold from the top in the right hand lane was off by one with respect to its counterpart in the left hand lane. I assumed that this mattered, given the route was supposed to be standardised, and if they realised this after the event it would be a bit of a farce. Especially so if a record was set. I wandered over to find someone to tell, but as I was looking for an official there was an announcement over the PA system that there was a problem with the wall that they needed to change. Someone else had spotted it! The cherry picker was moved into place to fix the wall. This took about ten minutes, but as this was happening I realised they were fixing something else. The announcement explained that they were replacing the ropes. A few of the climbers had said that the automatic belay ropes on the right hand lane did not feel right, so the cherry picker was replacing those and not the hold that I had noticed being out of place. The climbers had noticed something wasn’t quite right, but hadn’t said anything about the out of place hold. I wandered over again to find someone to tell. I wasn’t sure who, but found a couple of people in (what appeared to be) team jackets and showed them the photo. One of them quickly ran off to tell an official. An announcement was made that there was another issue with the wall that needed to be fixed and the cherry picker moved back into place. So now the wall was fixed, but it seemed even more off as the hold being in its correct position slightly overflowed onto the banner. Which made the banner look incorrectly placed again. It was right, but it looked wrong. It had always looked wrong. That was the point, at least when there was a banner running down the middle. Maybe I spotted the issue because of the photo I had taken a couple of years previously, and the only time I watch speed climbing is when it happens here in the village so I’m not visually fatigued by a hundred views of the same thing. Or maybe if I had seen it a hundred times I would notice it anyway. The evidence suggests not, because the people who do this and watch this all the time hadn’t noticed it. There’s some sort of lesson here about how any repetitive manual process will, given enough time, result in a mistake. I assume it would be trivial to at least automate the checking of the wall once it has been constructed1. The kicker is that the out of place hold hasn’t been used in a long time. The climbers have optimised their route such that it is skipped. The same happens to the fourth hold from the bottom. So either being in the wrong place is immaterial to the climbers’ technique as long as they don’t get in the way. Maybe that’s why they didn’t notice it? If this were actual code review the correct comment would be something like “this piece hasn’t been used for years, it should be deleted”. But this is something in physical space, and there would be arguments that removing it (them) means the route has changed, thus times are no longer comparable. Also, maybe in future someone will optimise the route using that currently unused hold four down from the top? It’s possible - for years people were saying a time under five seconds would never be achieved. The current world record stands at 4.74s. Maybe when the record is unbeaten for more than a couple of years they should throw it all away and start with a brand new route?
Summary
The Championnats d’Europe d’Escalade in Villars-sur-Ollon recently concluded, and the finals of the Speed event were particularly noteworthy. Speed climbing, much like skateboarding in the Olympics, is not a true representation of the sport for the majority of participants, but it remains entertaining for spectators. The event involves head-to-head races up a 15-meter wall, with the route being standardized to allow for time comparisons over the years.
During the competition, there were observations that the climber on the left always seemed to win. This led to speculation about whether the stronger climber was consistently placed in the left lane or if it was merely a psychological effect. The standardized route is supposed to ensure fairness, but there are always uncontrollable factors, such as the altitude of Villars at 1,200 meters above sea level.
As the rounds progressed, it became apparent that something was off with the wall. A banner running down the middle of the wall, which was not perfectly centered, gave the impression that the right lane was narrower. Upon closer inspection, it was discovered that the fourth hold from the top in the right lane was misaligned compared to its counterpart in the left lane. This discrepancy could potentially invalidate the results if discovered post-event, especially if a record was set.
Image: A climbing wall with standardized routes for speed climbing.
An announcement was made about an issue with the wall, and a cherry picker was brought in to fix it. Initially, it seemed they were addressing the misaligned hold, but it turned out they were replacing the automatic belay ropes on the right lane, which some climbers had reported as problematic. The misaligned hold was not immediately addressed until it was pointed out by a spectator. This led to another round of fixes, making the wall appear even more off due to the banner placement.
The incident highlights the importance of automating repetitive manual processes to avoid mistakes. The misaligned hold had not been used in years, as climbers had optimized their routes to skip it. This situation is akin to a piece of code that hasn’t been used for years and should be deleted. However, in physical space, removing it would mean changing the route, making past times incomparable. There is always the possibility that future climbers might optimize their routes using currently unused holds.
The current world record for speed climbing stands at 4.74 seconds, a time once thought impossible. Perhaps when the record remains unbeaten for a few years, it might be time to introduce a new route.
Remember these 3 key ideas for your startup:
Automate Repetitive Processes: Just as the climbing event highlighted the need for automation to avoid manual errors, startups should invest in automating repetitive tasks to ensure consistency and accuracy. This can save time and reduce the risk of human error.
Regular Audits and Inspections: Regular checks and audits can prevent small issues from becoming significant problems. Whether it's a climbing wall or a business process, periodic reviews can help maintain standards and ensure everything is in order.
Adapt and Optimize: The climbers' ability to optimize their routes by skipping certain holds is a lesson in adaptability. Startups should continually look for ways to optimize their operations and adapt to changing circumstances to stay competitive.
Edworking is the best and smartest decision for SMEs and startups to be more productive. Edworking is a FREE superapp of productivity that includes all you need for work powered by AI in the same superapp, connecting Task Management, Docs, Chat, Videocall, and File Management. Save money today by not paying for Slack, Trello, Dropbox, Zoom, and Notion.
For more details, see the original source.
