after talking with several strong people (koyamada, robinson, windisch) they all suggested to start in the most logical and clear position. its also a way to avoid any "discussions" about the startholds in the future. so the "new" start woud be matched both hands on a very obvious rail (the rail on which i have my right heel in the pic below). it is the lowest hold. you don't need a pad, just a carpet/small foampad and its kind of a "lay-down-start".
|"new" laydownstart: both hands matched on the rail i have my right heel on. pic by angela wagner|
before i started on a to me also "logical" sitdownstart. sitting and with my right hand on the same rail but my left allready on the crimp further up. i am still not sure if this "new" start really makes much sense or not - its a logical possibility for sure and it stops any discussions about "the" startingholds. but the concept of "sitting down and taking the holds you get" seems also pretty ok with me. but as these days strange things happen to sitdownstarts and discussions about it (story of two worlds), its may more consequent to go from the lowest and most logical holds. its then somehow defined (and shoud be decently marked in areas where thats ok, like in the ticino) and like that missunderstandings of the start-position/holds can be easily avoided.
|same move, different angle. new start both hands on the big rail. first move then up to where i have the left hand in the pic. its an "easy" move for itself, but it makes continuing SUPER HARD!!! pic by ronny birchler|
i still can climb the sequence, but a consequence oft that new start is that its WAY harder now. you can FEEL the new start when entering into the crux at the end. i am not too happy about that, for me it was allready hard enough from the sds...