The Piolet d'Or is Back - Climbing Magazine | Rock Climbing, Mountaineering, Bouldering, Ice Climbing The Piolet d'Or is Back Avatar: 0 Marko Prezelj accepting the 2007 Piolet d’Or for a new route on Chomolhari, climbed in 2006 with Boris Lorencic. Prezelj used the occasion to criticize the concept of prizes for alpinism, and the 2008 event was scrapped while the prize program was reorganized. Courtesy of Montagnes Magazine. The Piolet d’Or will return this spring after a one-year hiatus and a search for a new format that aims to make such prizes acceptable to those who believe alpinism has no winners and losers. Created in 1991, the Piolets d’Ornow offered in pluralwill be presented again in late April as part of an international mountain festival. The Piolet d’Or event in 2008 was canceled in the face of criticism from many top alpinists, including winners of the award.

Since then, under the leadership of Christian Trommsdorff, co-president of the French Groupe de Haute Montagne (GHM), the Piolets d’Or have been significantly reorganized. This year, the jury will have the option of choosing multiple “winners” from the pool of final nominees. In addition, one climber each year will be honored with a Piolet d’Or for lifetime achievement. The jury will have no representatives from the event sponsors, which include the GHM, Vertical and Montagnes magazines, and the towns of Chamonix-Mont Blanc, France, and Courmayeur, Italy. The formerly French-dominated award ceremony will be held in two countriesFrance and Italyand the jury will be broadly international. Doug Scott from the U.K. will be this year’s jury president. The new Piolets d’Or charter reflects a commitment to lightweight alpinism. It says, “In modern mountaineering, questions of style and means of ascent take precedence over reaching the objective itself….

The Piolets d’Or throw the spotlight on imaginative and innovative new routes, using a minimum amount of equipment, and building on experience.” In addition to climbing difficulty, the jury will consider three categories of “respect”: for people (including porters and other local employees); for the environment; and for future generations of mountaineers. Coincidentally, the most recent edition of Climbing announces the 2008 Golden Piton Awards, Climbing’s annual prize for achievements in various climbing disciplines. The Golden Pitons went to: • Chris Sharma (sport) • Fumitaka Ichimura, Yusuke Sato, and Katsutaka Yokoyama (alpine) • Tommy Caldwell (big wall) Piolet d'Or Career Award for Sir Chris It has been confirmed that Sir Chris Bonington is set to receive one of the most prestigious awards in the outdoor world. The Piolet d’Or Career is a lifetime achievement award and is only presented to mountaineers whose achievements have inspired successive generations. Previous winners include Doug Scott, Chris’ climbing partner on many expeditions, and other leading names such as Reinhold Messner and Walter Bonatti.

The Piolets d’Or are the most sought after awards in mountaineering and the 23rd event will be held in Courmayeur and Chamonix from 9th-12th April, hosted by French magazine Montagnes and by the Groupe de Haute Montagne (GHM). Another member of the Berghaus team, Mick Fowler, has won two Piolets d’Or with his climbing partner Paul Ramsden, in 2003 and 2013, for major expeditions in the Himalaya. Sir Chris will be the seventh person to win a Piolet d’Or Career and had this to say when he heard the news: “The Piolet d’Or award means a huge amount to me because not only is it from my peers within the mountaineering world, but also from the GHM which is the original elite group of international mountaineers which I was invited to join a good many years ago. For me, it is the most special form of recognition within the climbing world.” Congratulations to Sir Chris from everyone at Berghaus for this very well deserved accolade in recognition of a long, glittering (and ongoing!) career of climbing and adventure.

Piolet d’Or awarded to Slovenians Piolet d’Or awarded to Slovenians Posted by Tina Gardner on 29/01/2007 The 16th Piolet d’Or award has been won by the Slovenian duo Boris Lorencic and Marko Prezelj for their first ascent of the 6,000-foot Northwest Pillar on the 24,000 ft Tibetan Peak Chomo Lhari. This is a second time win for Prezelj, having previously won the inaugural award in 1991. The Piolet d’Or is awarded by the French magazine Montagnes for what is considered by a jury to be the "best" alpine climb of the year. Flying the flag for Great Britain was the nomination for Ian Parnell and Tim Emmett's new route on Kedar Dome, India. You can read more about this year's award on Climbing.com . The award in general is not without controversy, as Chair of the BMC International Committee points out in an article in The Alpinist .

Le Piolet d'Or, Whither Prized for Alpinism - AAC Publications - Search The American Alpine Journal and Accidents Le Piolet d'Or, Whither Prized for Alpinism Le Piolet d'Or, Whither Prized for Alpinism Feature Article Le Piolet d'Or Whither prizes for alpinism? Arguments over the wisdom of attempting to honor the “best climb of the year” came to a head before and after the 16th Piolet d’Or ceremony in Grenoble, France, on January 26, 2007. The Piolet d’Or is sponsored by the French magazine Montagnes, with the winner chosen each year by a jury of climbers and journalists. In recent years, several nominated teams of climbers have declined to participate in the awards program, arguing that such awards run counter to the spirit of alpinism, and that comparing ascents of different styles is impossible. In late 2006, the Groupe de Haute Montagne (GHM), a cofounder of the Piolet d’Or program, said it would no longer cooperate with Montagnes on the awards.

Nonetheless, the 16th annual Piolet d’Or awards proceeded, and the jury chose to honor Boris Lorencic and Marko Prezelj for their first ascent of the northwest pillar of 7,326-meter Chomolhari, on the border of Tibet and Bhutan. (Prezelj’s account of this climb begins on page 14 of this Journal.) Prezelj, who received the very first Piolet d’Or, in 1991, and has been nominated a total of four times for the prize, spoke out against the awards at the 2007 ceremony in Grenoble; afterward, at the request of Montagnes, he wrote an essay opposing such prizes, which he disseminated widely, generating much discussion. Montagnes responded with an editorial stating its arguments for maintaining the award and promising to revise the program with critics’ concerns in mind. As of June 2007, the magazine had not yet announced its plans for the 17th Piolet d’Or. Because we feel that this discussion touches on many issues vital to today’s climbers—Why do we climb? What is the meaning of success?

Is climbing a “sport” with winners and losers?—and because most of the past winners of the Piolet d’Or have written articles for the AAJ about their ascents, we present both Prezelj’s original essay and the Montagnes editorial for your consideration. Gladiators and Clowns d’Or Marko Prezelj February 2007 Several people criticized me for participating in the Piolet d’Or ceremony this year. None of them were in Grenoble. Joining this circus gave me the opportunity to present my opinion about the award publicly. Time will tell if doing so was a mistake. I don’t believe in awards for alpinism, much less trophies or titles presented by the public or the media. At the ceremony I could see and feel the competitive spirit created and fueled by the event’s organizers. Most of the climbers readily accepted this mood without understanding that they had been pushed into an arena where spectators thrive on drama, where winner and loser are judged. It is not possible to judge another person’s climb objectively. Each ascent contains untold stories, influenced by expectations and illusions that develop long before setting foot on the mountain. In alpinism, even the most personal judgments are extremely subjective.

When we return from the mountains we remember moments differently than they were—there and then—when we had to make decisions under the pressure of many factors. Comparing different climbs is not possible without some kind of personal involvement, and even then it is difficult. Last year I climbed in Alaska, Patagonia, and Tibet. I cannot decide which expedition was the most…the “most what,” in fact? To illustrate this, I asked (during the first part of ceremony) the father of several children to decide which one was the best and which was the worst? He could not answer. I might choose which wine, food, song, book, or movie I like the most in a certain moment, but a jury cannot decide which is the best, worst, or “most” for everyone in one year. If a jury chooses a single winner, it automatically implies a loser, which is the essence of competition. And first place means there is a second, third, and last place. Is the last-place climb truly the worst, or were the winners simply more adept at the manipulation game? Did they exaggerate the “beauty” of their ascent more effectively or market themselves better to the jury?

The idea of inspirational gatherings of climbers is positive, but I cannot support the absurd idea of those same climbers “competing” at alpinism. At the Piolet d’Or ceremony, I said the trophy is not important to me because the choice of a winner is subjective, like singing and beauty contests, and commercial influence on the event is obvious and definite. My broken English prevented me from being clear. But the story of the Piolet d’Or makes it clear that comparing climbs (and the protagonists and their ideals) is nonsense, especially doing so for one calendar year. If comparison is impossible, what are the media and sponsors presenting and promoting, and why? Are they doing it for increased sales, or for fame maybe? In Slovenia, where I come from, fame has a woman’s name: Slava. Old people used to say, “Slava je kurba” (“fame is a bitch”); one day she is sleeping with one, and the next day with another. Fame is a cheap trap set by the media in which the complacent are quickly caught and exploited, realizing too late that trust and honor do not live in the same house as notoriety.

The public doesn’t truly care about climbers, who are links in an incestuous chain binding sick hunger for attention to media that promote or criticize according to their interests. The Piolet d’Or shows that organizers know and count on the cruel fact that they will always find plenty of desperate, passionate gladiators and clowns to role-play in the fame game. The more interesting question is: Is it a reality show or a soap opera? If the romantic idea of the Piolet d’Or will survive in the future it must evolve into a simple gathering where climbers can exchange ideas and share their dreams, illusions, and realities. Perhaps they might even climb together—with no one cast as winner or loser. I ask the media and the promoters to stop forcing the competitive spirit into alpinism, and to start respecting alpinists, their human differences, and the creative ideas that make alpinism a complicated and rewarding experience. I apologize if I have offended anyone who is addicted to Miss Fame; she gets around, so watch out for STDs. And finally: Alpinists are bullets, and the media is a rifle. Where is the target?

Elite Philippe Descamps April 2007 At long last, the debate on the Piolet d’Or is open! Thanks to Marko Prezelj’s provocative statements, our mountaineering community has started to exchange points of view and to ask itself questions about the award’s meaning. From the organizers’ point of view, certain statements could seem a little bit unfair or even out of place. But to understand the passionate stances, one must understand the issues at the heart of the debate, which is far from being simplistic. While everybody agrees on the dangers of an excessively competitive spirit, there is also a broad consensus on the importance of providing a space where great mountaineers can meet together and with the public. It’s now only a question of finding the right formula, the right balance. Far from fostering a spirit of healthy emulation, the logic of pure competition is not only bad for mountaineering as a whole, it is also dangerous for mountaineers individually. Distracted by financial objectives, mountaineers are encouraged to overstretch their capacity, to make use of performance-boosting substances, and to take inconsiderate risks.

An excessive competitive spirit fosters a feeling of superiority, which in turn develops into arrogance and creates a hierarchical vision of the community. Within the mountaineering community, the race for celebrity didn’t wait for the Piolet d’Or. The media hierarchies set up in the ’70s and ’80s were mostly determined by the talent of the various press agents. By becoming international, by attempting to formulate objective criteria—however imperfect—and by taking an ethical stance, the juries of the Piolet d’Or have over the years managed to defend a certain style of mountaineering. None of those who were awarded the Piolet d’Or over the last 16 years were undeserving, even if their exploits sometimes had very little in common. The juries’ decisions were coherent with the defense of a certain style of mountaineering, which has had a lasting influence on the evolution of mentalities in many countries. If the staging of the award ceremony probably needs to be revisited, the show of the past few years has at least had the merit of showing that mountaineering needs spokespersons more than it needs champions.

The real challenge for the members of the mountaineering elite is to open up to the world, to meet each other, and to share their experiences with the public. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, we know that the greatest arsenals are of no use if their only purpose is to protect those who despise the values that they pretend they are defending. We know since Vilfredo Pareto [the French-Italian sociologist and economist] that history is a “cemetery of aristocracies.” Clubs are for a fossilized elite who have lost all contact with reality. The experience of these last years has proven that if they stay within the boundaries of their professional objectives and don’t try to overstep their competence, specialized journalists have an important part to play in the evolution of mountaineering. Their job is to check on the information at its source, to cross-reference the information, if possible, with information from other sources, and to make the information understandable by putting it into perspective. It’s not about objectivity—there is no such thing—but about a subjective point of view trying to embrace the largest number of objective facts possible. That is the art of critique.

It has nothing to do with the art of propaganda, which is all about passing things off for what they are not. If the question today is whether we should rethink the Piolet d’Or or scrap it, one has to start from what it is today: a prize that is known throughout the world and which helps promote mountaineering and its universal values. Whom does it profit? Mountaineers and mountaineering as a whole. All ideas are welcome. The discussion is open. We will make the selection criteria more explicit and give mountaineers a bigger say in the outcome, by giving the competing teams an opportunity to vote for their favorite climb (their own excluded). We also intend to break away from [being] a French event by taking a more international approach, in order to better promote the specificity and the meaning of the different nations’ approach to mountaineering. The competition is open again for mountaineers and for all men of good will. This editorial originally appeared in Montagnes No. 316. Translated from the French by Anthony Moinet. \0xD7 Le Piolet d'Or, Whither Prized for Alpinism Le Piolet d'Or Whither prizes for alpinism?

Arguments over the wisdom of attempting to honor the “best climb of the year” came to a head before and after the 16th Piolet d’Or ceremony in Grenoble, France, on January 26, 2007. The Piolet d’Or is sponsored by the French magazine Montagnes, with the winner chosen each year by a jury of climbers and journalists. In recent years, several nominated teams of climbers have declined to participate in the awards program, arguing that such awards run counter to the spirit of alpinism, and that comparing ascents of different styles is impossible. In late 2006, the Groupe de Haute Montagne (GHM), a cofounder of the Piolet d’Or program, said it would no longer cooperate with Montagnes on the awards. Nonetheless, the 16th annual Piolet d’Or awards proceeded, and the jury chose to honor Boris Lorencic and Marko Prezelj for their first ascent of the northwest pillar of 7,326-meter Chomolhari, on the border of Tibet and Bhutan.

(Prezelj’s account of this climb begins on page 14 of this Journal.) Prezelj, who received the very first Piolet d’Or, in 1991, and has been nominated a total of four times for the prize, spoke out against the awards at the 2007 ceremony in Grenoble; afterward, at the request of Montagnes, he wrote an essay opposing such prizes, which he disseminated widely, generating much discussion. Montagnes responded with an editorial stating its arguments for maintaining the award and promising to revise the program with critics’ concerns in mind. As of June 2007, the magazine had not yet announced its plans for the 17th Piolet d’Or. Because we feel that this discussion touches on many issues vital to today’s climbers—Why do we climb? What is the meaning of success? Is climbing a “sport” with winners and losers?—and because most of the past winners of the Piolet d’Or have written articles for the AAJ about their ascents, we present both Prezelj’s original essay and the Montagnes editorial for your consideration.

Gladiators and Clowns d’Or Marko Prezelj February 2007 Several people criticized me for participating in the Piolet d’Or ceremony this year. None of them were in Grenoble. Joining this circus gave me the opportunity to present my opinion about the award publicly. Time will tell if doing so was a mistake. I don’t believe in awards for alpinism, much less trophies or titles presented by the public or the media. At the ceremony I could see and feel the competitive spirit created and fueled by the event’s organizers. Most of the climbers readily accepted this mood without understanding that they had been pushed into an arena where spectators thrive on drama, where winner and loser are judged. It is not possible to judge another person’s climb objectively. Each ascent contains untold stories, influenced by expectations and illusions that develop long before setting foot on the mountain. In alpinism, even the most personal judgments are extremely subjective. When we return from the mountains we remember moments differently than they were—there and then—when we had to make decisions under the pressure of many factors. Comparing different climbs is not possible without some kind of personal involvement, and even then it is difficult.

Last year I climbed in Alaska, Patagonia, and Tibet. I cannot decide which expedition was the most…the “most what,” in fact? To illustrate this, I asked (during the first part of ceremony) the father of several children to decide which one was the best and which was the worst? He could not answer. I might choose which wine, food, song, book, or movie I like the most in a certain moment, but a jury cannot decide which is the best, worst, or “most” for everyone in one year. If a jury chooses a single winner, it automatically implies a loser, which is the essence of competition. And first place means there is a second, third, and last place. Is the last-place climb truly the worst, or were the winners simply more adept at the manipulation game? Did they exaggerate the “beauty” of their ascent more effectively or market themselves better to the jury? The idea of inspirational gatherings of climbers is positive, but I cannot support the absurd idea of those same climbers “competing” at alpinism.

At the Piolet d’Or ceremony, I said the trophy is not important to me because the choice of a winner is subjective, like singing and beauty contests, and commercial influence on the event is obvious and definite. My broken English prevented me from being clear. But the story of the Piolet d’Or makes it clear that comparing climbs (and the protagonists and their ideals) is nonsense, especially doing so for one calendar year. If comparison is impossible, what are the media and sponsors presenting and promoting, and why? Are they doing it for increased sales, or for fame maybe? In Slovenia, where I come from, fame has a woman’s name: Slava. Old people used to say, “Slava je kurba” (“fame is a bitch”); one day she is sleeping with one, and the next day with another. Fame is a cheap trap set by the media in which the complacent are quickly caught and exploited, realizing too late that trust and honor do not live in the same house as notoriety. The public doesn’t truly care about climbers, who are links in an incestuous chain binding sick hunger for attention to media that promote or criticize according to their interests.

The Piolet d’Or shows that organizers know and count on the cruel fact that they will always find plenty of desperate, passionate gladiators and clowns to role-play in the fame game. The more interesting question is: Is it a reality show or a soap opera? If the romantic idea of the Piolet d’Or will survive in the future it must evolve into a simple gathering where climbers can exchange ideas and share their dreams, illusions, and realities. Perhaps they might even climb together—with no one cast as winner or loser. I ask the media and the promoters to stop forcing the competitive spirit into alpinism, and to start respecting alpinists, their human differences, and the creative ideas that make alpinism a complicated and rewarding experience. I apologize if I have offended anyone who is addicted to Miss Fame; she gets around, so watch out for STDs. And finally: Alpinists are bullets, and the media is a rifle. Where is the target? Elite Philippe Descamps April 2007 At long last, the debate on the Piolet d’Or is open!

Thanks to Marko Prezelj’s provocative statements, our mountaineering community has started to exchange points of view and to ask itself questions about the award’s meaning. From the organizers’ point of view, certain statements could seem a little bit unfair or even out of place. But to understand the passionate stances, one must understand the issues at the heart of the debate, which is far from being simplistic. While everybody agrees on the dangers of an excessively competitive spirit, there is also a broad consensus on the importance of providing a space where great mountaineers can meet together and with the public. It’s now only a question of finding the right formula, the right balance. Far from fostering a spirit of healthy emulation, the logic of pure competition is not only bad for mountaineering as a whole, it is also dangerous for mountaineers individually. Distracted by financial objectives, mountaineers are encouraged to overstretch their capacity, to make use of performance-boosting substances, and to take inconsiderate risks. An excessive competitive spirit fosters a feeling of superiority, which in turn develops into arrogance and creates a hierarchical vision of the community.

Within the mountaineering community, the race for celebrity didn’t wait for the Piolet d’Or. The media hierarchies set up in the ’70s and ’80s were mostly determined by the talent of the various press agents. By becoming international, by attempting to formulate objective criteria—however imperfect—and by taking an ethical stance, the juries of the Piolet d’Or have over the years managed to defend a certain style of mountaineering. None of those who were awarded the Piolet d’Or over the last 16 years were undeserving, even if their exploits sometimes had very little in common. The juries’ decisions were coherent with the defense of a certain style of mountaineering, which has had a lasting influence on the evolution of mentalities in many countries. If the staging of the award ceremony probably needs to be revisited, the show of the past few years has at least had the merit of showing that mountaineering needs spokespersons more than it needs champions. The real challenge for the members of the mountaineering elite is to open up to the world, to meet each other, and to share their experiences with the public.

Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, we know that the greatest arsenals are of no use if their only purpose is to protect those who despise the values that they pretend they are defending. We know since Vilfredo Pareto [the French-Italian sociologist and economist] that history is a “cemetery of aristocracies.” Clubs are for a fossilized elite who have lost all contact with reality. The experience of these last years has proven that if they stay within the boundaries of their professional objectives and don’t try to overstep their competence, specialized journalists have an important part to play in the evolution of mountaineering. Their job is to check on the information at its source, to cross-reference the information, if possible, with information from other sources, and to make the information understandable by putting it into perspective. It’s not about objectivity—there is no such thing—but about a subjective point of view trying to embrace the largest number of objective facts possible. That is the art of critique. It has nothing to do with the art of propaganda, which is all about passing things off for what they are not.

If the question today is whether we should rethink the Piolet d’Or or scrap it, one has to start from what it is today: a prize that is known throughout the world and which helps promote mountaineering and its universal values. Whom does it profit? Mountaineers and mountaineering as a whole. All ideas are welcome. The discussion is open. We will make the selection criteria more explicit and give mountaineers a bigger say in the outcome, by giving the competing teams an opportunity to vote for their favorite climb (their own excluded). We also intend to break away from [being] a French event by taking a more international approach, in order to better promote the specificity and the meaning of the different nations’ approach to mountaineering. The competition is open again for mountaineers and for all men of good will. This editorial originally appeared in Montagnes No. 316. Translated from the French by Anthony Moinet. This AAJ article has been reformatted into HTML. Please contact us if you spot an error.

Asia Piolet d'or awarded to Urubko and Samilov for new route on Manaslu Asia Piolet d'or awarded to Urubko and Samilov for new route on Manaslu 13.11.2006 di PlanetMountain On 10/11/2006 the Kazak mountaineers Denis Urubko and Serguey Samoilov won the first edition of the Piolet d'or Asia, the award created by Men and Mountain, Montagnes Magazine and Grivel for the best mountaineering achievement carried out by Asian mountaineers. A weekend marked by great mountaineering in Seoul for the first edition of an event entitled "Piolet d'or". Yes, you're read correctly, we're talking about the Asian version of the famous "Golden ice axe", the annual award now in its 11th year organised by the French Montagnes Magazine and the "Groupe de Haute Montagne" for the most significant mountaineering achievement worldwide. Last Friday the South Korean capital celebrated the "Piolet d'or Asia" which, naturally, recognised the best ascent carried out by Asian climbers in 2006.

The initiative came about thanks to the collaboration between the Korean magazine Men and Mountain, the French Montagnes Magazine and, obviously Grivel. The company based in Courmayeur is not only a member of the organisation but has also, since the outset, created the much desired Trophy (the golden ice axe, of course). Let's start off by saying that the first two to add their names to the Piolet d'or Asia Honour's List were two mountaineers well-known in both the classic Piolet d'or circuit and to those who follow Himalayan mountaineering. The newly created award was won by the Kazakh mountaineers Denis Urubko and Serguey Samoilov for their new route up the NE Face of Manaslu (8163 m). This great ascent (read: new route, fast, alpine style) was carried out by the duo on 4 - 9 May 2005. It's worth noting that this is their second new route on another 8000m peak: in 2005 they climbed the virgin SW Face of Broad Peak (8048m).

Understandably the strong Kazakh mountaineers had received a nomination for this ascent in the Piolet d'or 2006 (which refers to ascents carried out in 2005) in its "classic" and "worldwide" version hosted in France (and which was ultimately won by the duo House - Anderson for their ascent up Nanga Parbat's Rupal Face). This Asian event used the tried and tested "nominations" system, from which the Jury chose the "best realisation" of the year. So in the running for the Asia's maximum mountaineering recognition, apart from Urubko and Samilov for "their" Manaslu, were two other teams. The first were Katsutaka Yokoyama and Fumitaka Ichimura from Japan for the new route "Before dawn" (1000m with difficulties up to 5 - 5.9, WI4+, M6) climbed last September on the North Face of Broken Tooth (2760m) in Alaska.

While the second team with title hopes were the Koreans Gu Eun-Su and Yu Sang-Beom for their new route (third overall and first Korean) via Thalay Sagar's North Face (6904m) in the Indian Himalaya. As mentioned previously the international jury - comprised of Im Duc Young (mountaineer, stylist and journalist working for some of the most important Korean magazines), Philippe Descamp (chief editor of Montagnes magazine), Valery Babanov (mountaineer), Tsunemichi Ikeda (journalist for Rock and snow, the most important Japanese climbing magazine), 2 journalists from the Korean Climber magazine and a journalist from the Korean Man and Mountain magazine - chose to award the prize to the Kazakh duo on Manaslu. And there's no doubt that this is a decision we agree with as (and you can bet on this) we'll be seeing Urubko and Samilov in the list of nominations for the next edition of the Piolet d'or, in its classic worldwide version which takes place in the starting months of each new year in France. All that needs to be added is the fact that the success of the event exceeded all expectations.

The evening was celebrated with a dinner at which 500 people were invited and the interest, on behalf of the media and public, was enormous. As if to say: let's hope there will be a hundred more of these Asian Piolet which (let's hope) will help us to discover in the next editions just a bit (and there's plenty) of their mountaineering which is "submerged" and so rarely sees the light here in the west. Ah, before we forget: did you know the Korean alpine federation has more than 1,200,00 members? Spirit of Alpinism Strong at 2011 Piolet d'Or - Alpinist.com Alpinist.com Mark Busch / April 30, 2010 Also in This Style Derek Franz / January 10, 2017 advertisement Spirit of Alpinism Strong at 2011 Piolet d'Or Keese Lane Add to Flipboard Magazine. The two teams of 2011 Piolet D'Or on stage after accepting their award in Chamonix.

The award celebrates the finest mountaineering accomplishment(s) of the year using a criterion of style, commitment, difficulty and ethics. [Photo] Keese Lane The 2011 Piolet d'Or recipients were announced today at the ceremonies in Chamonix, France. In its nineteenth year, the award is presented by the French magazine Montagnes, and the Groupe de Haute Montagne (GHM). The award recognizes the finest mountaineering accomplishment of the year using a criterion of style, commitment, difficulty and ethics. For past two years, the Piolet d'Or has been a constant topic of controversy. Climbers have questioned the award's motivation, process and the ethics that the awards represent. After a hiatus in 2008 , the awards returned with a new charter emphasizing climbs done in good style and spirit. Now in their third year under the new charter, the awards have put aside much of the lingering controversy.

advertisement Critiques of the 2005 award , which was given to a team that left much of the equipment from their siege-style ascent on Jannu, will be pleased to note the combined amount of equipment left behind by this year's six nominated teams amounts to some slings and a handful of nuts and cams. Jury member Simon Anthamatten made it very clear in his interrogation of the nominees during their presentations that commitment and style would be key considerations in determining the recipients of the Piolet d'Or 2011. As for the athletes themselves, most were honored by simply being nominated. When asked about his feelings on the award, Paul Figg told Alpinist that "winning the Piolet would be the cherry on the cake, but I've already won (in reference to the climb he did with Malcolm Bass on Vasuki Parbat)." Anthamatten described his criteria for selecting the finalists as "climbs that make me say 'wow.'" The climbers impressed the audience with their audacity and spirit with each of their presentations. Norwegian Bjorn-Eivind Aartun and American Colin Haley recalled their 71-hour push on Foraker .

The pair climbed in ultra-light style, with daypacks and a "safety margin" that Aartun described as "having two ropes instead one and some extra fuel". Malcolm Bass and Paul Figg gave an impressive slide show, relying on a friend's charcoal paintings to illustrate their ascent of Vasuki Parbat . In addition to losing a tent pole, they also dropped their only camera while on the face. Their narrative heavy presentation contrasted with the Greenland explorers' video, photo and musical documentary of their time sailing to previously unclimbed walls on Greenland's coast . Belgians Nicolas Favresse, Olivier Favresse and Sean Vilanueva, and American Ben Ditto were "lured" to Greenland with photos of a virgin wall whose location their Scottish skipper, Bob Shepton, refused to disclose unless the team agreed to travel with him and help him sail the boat back across the Atlantic to the U.K. During their presentation, Kyle Dempster and Bruce Normand strongly advised against repeat ascents of the east face of Mt. Edgar , because of the objective dangers the pair faced during the approach.

The French team of Mathieu Detrie, Mathieu Meynadier and Sebastien Ratel's ascent of Lunag II was overshadowed by the recent death of their teammate and fellow nominee Max Belleville, who died in a crevasse fall. And lastly, Alpinist readers will remember Yasushi Okada and Katsutaka Yokoyama's ascent of Mt. Logan's southeast face from the Alpinist 31 Mountain Profile . Nominees and jury members enjoy a day of sport climbing during the 2011 Piolet d'Or. [Photo] Keese Lane Just a few hours ago, the recipients of the 2011 Piolet d'Or were announced: Nicolas Favresse, Olivier Favresse, Sean Villanueva Ben Ditto and Bob Shepton for their vertical exploration on the coast of Greenland. Katsutaka Yokoyama and Yasushi Okada for I-TO (ED+: WI5 M6, 2500m) on Mt. Logan's southeast face. Greg Child, president of the jury, explained that their decision was made because they felt these climbs truly represented the spirit of alpinism.

The award was given to teams that demonstrated a "root" of climbing or between the climbers and the mountain. For Okada and Yokoyama, the jury felt that the amount of work the team spent preparing and executing the massive climb was truly in the spirit of alpinism. The Greenland expedition overwhelmed the audience and jury with their sense of camaraderie. As many members of the jury told Alpinist, it was the climb that everyone wished they were on. Originally seen as a wildcard, the Greenland expedition's antics and relaxed atmosphere were infectious, infusing the ceremonies with spontaneous outbursts of laughter and music. Child was confronted about the necessity of climbing a peak, or mountain, for a team to receive the Piolet d'Or. Child responded, saying that "climbing is not about numbers or statistics, but about the feeling in your gut." He noted that while the Greenland expedition is not the type of climb that usually wins such awards the fact that the team did all their climbing without using bolts or pitons was a style choice that should be celebrated as an example of what is possible on exploratory big-wall expeditions. This year's nominees all climbed with excellent style, completing difficult routes that each presented unique dangers and difficulties, he said.

As organizer Christian Trommsdorff pointed out throughout the ceremonies, the Piolet d'Or is not a competition, but a recognition of alpinism. Trommsdorff said his hope for the event is that it will provide young climbers with role models who keep not only the ethics, but the spirit of alpinism strong. In closing, he noted that the Piolet d'Or seems to have finally put the past controversies behind it, and is now a celebration of alpinism. Correction: The Greenland expedition placed one bolt over the course of their nine climbs. The team's written report stated the placement of a bolt, but when asked about it after the ceremony, several jury members said that they were unaware of that fact. -Ed. Bigwall Shanty from Alpinist Magazine on Vimeo .

(Video taken during the Greenland expedition's presentation.) Sources: Simon Anthamatten, Bjorn-Eivind Aartun, Malcolm Bass, Kyle Dempster, Mathieu Detrie, Ben Ditto, Nicolas Favresse, Olivier Favresse, Paul Figg, Colin Haley, Mathieu Meynadier, Bruce Normand, Yasushi Okada, Sebastien Ratel, Christian Trommsdorff, Sean Vilanueva, Katsutaka Yokoyama. Here at Alpinist, our small editorial staff works hard to create in-depth stories that are thoughtfully edited, thoroughly fact-checked and beautifully designed. Please consider supporting our efforts by subscribing . advertisement Everest K2 News ExplorersWeb - Piolet d'Or: Jury awards Prezelj and Lorencic - people choose Pavle Piolet d'Or: Jury awards Prezelj and Lorencic - people choose Pavle Posted: Jan 27, 2007 03:17 pm EST (MountEverest.net) Marko Prezelj and Boris Lorencic were awarded the 16th Piolet d'Or in Grenoble, France yesterday.

The Slovenian climbers opened a 1950m new route in alpine style on Chomolhari's NW pillar. The Slovenians' was the first ascent on the NW edge of the 7326m Tibetan peak - first summited in 1937. Winner Prezelj often teams up with Steve House, awarded last year after a new line on Nanga Parbat's Rupal face, together with Vince Anderson. Pavle, the public's favorite The attending public disagreed with the jury, and chose Pavel Kozjek, also Slovenian. Pavle was nominated for a new route on Cho Oyu (8201m), opened in a solo single push which took less than 15 hours. Pavle was also the first person to submit images of the Tibetan pilgrims shot at Nangpa La by Chinese border guards. His feat was awarded Best of ExplorersWeb last year. East and West continental divide The prestigious golden ice axe has endured much controversy in the past few years. In 2005, American Steve House criticized the prize for going to Russian Jannu North face climbers.

Steve got the prize the next year, awarded by new jury members, including alpine style purist Briton Stephen Venables. Finalist in both 2005 and 2006 for amazing new routes on difficult eightthousanders in alpine style Kazakh Denis Urubko has commented: "I'm happy that I climb for the sport only." The Asian jury awarded Denis together with his climbing partner Sergey Samoilov for the Asian version of the prize last year. A jury without GHM Also last year, the mixed team of Cerro Torre rebels Ermanno Salvaterro, Alessandro Beltrami and US resident Rolando Garibotti asked for their nomination to be withdrawn, stating that Piolet dOr is a subjective award pitting climbers against each other. And only weeks back, co-founder Group d'Haute Montagne (French High Mountain Group) left the award. The GHM climbers had represented the body of reference and moral caution of the prize, while Montagnes Magazine was in charge of communication and event organization.

After several years of co-management, the last ones with increasing relational dificulties, the GHM realized that...the necessary respect and confidence needed for the award of the Piolet d'Or are now impossible with Montagnes, wrote GHM, adding, GHM strongly wishes to promote alpinism and its realizations but not if it means blending styles and games. The question now is what's up with the prize. This year's nominees shouldnt have been controversial - all running for the prize with alpine-style ascents. It is yet to be seen whether the award will keep its prestige without the support of the French high altitude climbers. With only Montagnes magazine, the Piolet dor could end up just another award issued by specialized media.

Jury members this year (each with one vote) were: Americans Steve House and Vince Anderson, latest award-winners for a new route on Nanga Parbat's Rupal face; Italian Vinicio Stefanello, journalist with PlanetMountain.com; Montagnes magazine staff; Korean Im Duck Yong, journalist and founder of the Asian edition of Piolet d'Or; Swiss Michel Piola, Piolet d'Or in 1992 for a new route on Torres del Paine; French Christian Trommsdorff, nominated last year for a traverse on Chomo Lonzo; and Russian Yuri Koshelenko, awarded in 2003 for the opening of Nuptse East's south pillar with Valery Babanov. Other nominees for the award were: Kazakh Denis Urubko and Sergey Samoilov (for the second year), for the new route opened in alpine style on Manaslus NE face. Ukrainians Igor Chaplinsky, Andrey Rodiontsev and Orest Verbitsky for a first ascent on the north ridge of Shingu Charpa, a 5600m Karakorum spire located in Masherbrum massif.

Brits Ian Parnell and Tim Emmett, who climbed the SE Pillar of Kedarnath Dome (Kedar Dome), in India's Gangotri region. More on the awarded climb: Courting the bride of Kangchenjunga Marko Prezelj led a Slovenian team whose main goal was to open a new route on Chomolhari, also known as the Bride of Kangchenjunga, located on the Tibet-Bhutan border. The Slovenians acclimatized at Jangmo Gopsha peak (6706m), and then went for Chomolhari (about 7350m), divided in two groups, each on a different route. Rok Blagus, Tine Cuder, Samo Krmelj and Matej Kladnik climbed up a couloir on the north face. After a bivouac at 6800m they reached the east ridge, which they followed to the summit, on October 14. Difficulty degree has been set as TD+, 80/45-60, for the 1900m-long line.

Meanwhile Prezelj and Boris Lorencic attempted a new route on the NW ridge, in pretty bad weather conditions. We climbed the couloir and then traversed to the right onto a mixed buttress and up to the crest of NW Ridge," Marko wouls report later. "In the couloir we found knee deep snow and steep sections of hard snow and ice. The wind was strong, mixed with hard snow crystals and the climbing was serious up to M6+. Thin ice added difficulties to the mixed sections, which the climbers needed five days to overcome. After reaching the summit, they hoped to descend via the south ridge. Bad conditions however forced Marko and Boris to climb down the ascent route, which included another bivouac on the wall. In general it was a serious climb where logistics and choice of tactics were probably more important than just difficult moves of the body, added Marko. I led the entire climb and we graded the route ED2, M6+/30-70, c1950 m. Slovenian Marko Prezelj is an accomplished alpine-style climber who has opened dozens of difficult routes all over America and Asia.

Prezelj was also part of the K7-Charakusa-Nanga Parbat multi-header expedition led by American Steve House in 2004. Chomolhari is sacred to Tibetan Buddhists, and every year pilgrims assemble in the town of Phari Dsong, ten miles away, to walk in procession to the mountain. Its north face is a sheer 9,000-foot wall.The first ascent was made in 1937 by Spenser Chapman and Dawa Lama. Depending source, its altitude varies between 7314m - 7350m.

#Mountaineering #Mountaineering Piolet d'Or awarded to Thomas Huber and Iwan Wolf Piolet d'Or awarded to Thomas Huber and Iwan Wolf 15.01.2001 di PlanetMountain.com Thomas Huber and Iwan Wolf awarded prestigious Piolet d'Or 2001 by Montagnes Magazine for Shivas Line on Shivling "Piolet d'Or" 2001 The Nominees: Â Â ValÃ©ry Babanov (RUS) for his solo new route (1200m; 5c/6a, A2/A3, M6) on the North Face of Kangtega 6799m (Nepal). Â Â Patrice Glairon-Rappaz (FRA) for his solo ascent of "No Siesta" (7a/A2) Grandes Jorasses, 4208m (France). Â Â Mikhail Davy and Alexandre Klenov (RUS) for their new route (VI/A2) on Spantik, 7028m, (Pakistan).

( see article ) Â Â Thomas Huber (GER) and Iwan Wolf (SUI) for "Shiva's line" (A4/VII at 6200m) on Shivling, 6543 m, (India). Â Â David Jonglez (FRA) and Eduardo Alonso (ESP) for "Anissa" (1200m, 6b/A3) on Ketil (Greenland). Â Â Jules Cartwright and Ian Parnell (GB) for their new route on "Moonflower Buttress" (ED+) Mount Hunter (Alaska). Information: Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â The German Thomas Huber and Swiss Iwan Wolf have been awarded the 10th Piolet d'Or, promoted by the French Montagnes Magazine for the most significant ascent of the year. The two mountaineers received this prestigious award for their ascent of "Shiva's line", a 1500m route ascended between 29 and 31 May 2000 on the North Pillar of Shivling 6543m, situated in the Indian Himalaya.

"Shiva's line" follows a route on the North Pillar climbed in 1993 by the Italian duo Hans Kammerlander and Christoph Hainz and briefly shares a section of the "Japanese route" before continuing independently, climbing through the 400m headwall to the summit. This final overhanging section is graded A4/VII, and this at 6200m! According to Thomas Huber, "Shiva's line" is one of the most difficult routes he has ever climbed. No stranger to extremes, Thomas has made significant first ascents together with his brother Alexander such as 'El Nino' in 1998 and 'Golden Gate' in 2000, both on Yosemite's El Capitan, and a new route on the west face of Latok II (7108m) in 1997. The 'Bourse ExpÃ© Jeunes' was awarded by the French Alpine Club (CAF) to Marco Siffredi for his planned snowboard descent of Everest (the young Frenchman has already descended Cho Oyu in this manner) and to the climbers Elise Vincent and Xavier Knockaert for their planned world climbing trip.

Further information about "Shiva's line" (and splendid photos of the ascent) on the Huber brothers' website: Outdoor Research Athlete Kyle Dempster Wins Second Piolet d’Or Award | Verticulture by Outdoor Research Outdoor Research Athlete Kyle Dempster Wins Second Piolet d’Or Award By Outdoor Research, 09 April 2013 Sign Up CATEGORY Alpine & Ice Climbing Outdoor Research athlete Kyle Dempster has won his second Piolet d’Or award, this time for his bold 2012 climb of 23,901-foot Baintha Brakk (aka Ogre I) with U.S. climbers Hayden Kennedy and Josh Wharton. Dempster and Kennedy’s successful summit was only the third ever of the Ogre, first climbed in 1977 by Sir Chris Bonington and Doug Scott. The award, given annually by the French magazine Montagnes and The Groupe de Haute Montagne, celebrates the biggest achievements in alpinism from the previous calendar year.

The Ogre I ascent was Dempster and Kennedy’s second in a big year in Pakistan — the two Americans also pulled off the first ascent of the east face of 22,749-foot K7 with Slovenian Urban Novak earlier in the year. The 2013 Piolet d’Or is 30-year-old Dempster’s second. He also won the award in 2010 along with Bruce Normand and Jed Brown, for the trio’s first ascent of the north face of Xuelian West in the Chinese Tien Shan. 2013 was a unique year in the history of the Piolet D’Or, in that each climb nominated won the award.

Other winners were: Yasuhiro Hanatani, Hiroyoshi Manome, and Tatsuya Aoki — Kyashar (22,211 feet), Nepal Sergey Nilov, Dmitry Golovchenko, and Alexander Lange — Mustagh Tower (23,898 feet), Pakistan Sandy Allan and Rick Allen — Nanga Parbat (26,657 feet), Pakistan Sebastien Bohin, Seb Ratel, Didier Jourdain, and Seb Moatti — Kamet (25,446 feet), India Mick Fowler and Paul Ramsden — Shiva (20,151 feet), India For more information on Dempster and Kennedy’s first ascent of Ogre I, see Climbing.com’s “ The Third Ascent of The Ogre .” Outdoor Research Outdoor Research® is Designed by Adventure®. We provide Innovation and Inspiration for the Relentless Adventurer. Based in Seattle, Outdoor Research was founded in 1981 after a failed piece of gear on an Alaskan climbing expedition inspired ideas for a better design. We develop innovative, functional, bomb-proof products that are beautiful in their simplicity, and our gear is backed by our Infinite Guarantee®.

We listen to, value and empower each other and our fellow adventurers, inviting input from our customers, Athlete Ambassadors and the International Federation of Mountain Guides Associations Test Team. We answer to our customers, not Wall Street. We’re growing, as a company and as individuals. And we’re having fun along the way..

Question: The Piolet d'Or is a major award by the French magazine Montagnes for?
Answer: Mountaineering