Massive thread on this on rec.climbing a while ago. Generally agreed it was terrible article and nobody would climb with a belayer using that BS technique.

But seriously, anyone reading the mags for technique or safety info should stay in the gym. Both of them routinely spew terrible advice.

the belay device is clearly upside down in all of the illustrations

There's nothing wrong with the technique described in the Climb Safe section of R&I #146. It's a technique that thousands of climbers use succesfully all of the time.

I haven't seen the article, but can't you flip some tube devices upside down to increase friction? hence the device would be upside down, but that is ok?

My question to you is where do the 1000s of climbers who use the technique in the article climb?

But seriously, anyone reading the mags for technique or safety info should stay in the gym. Both of them routinely spew terrible advice.

There is plenty wrong with the technique, but I'll save that for another post. Jay

The method does seem a little impractical, but the main idea of creating more friction by not using the Atc with the paralell style does make sense.

I am sooo lucky because just this last weekend, I removed my brake hand for a whole fracton of a second and my partner didn't die, though he definitely could have. It was a close one though, and I'll never make that horrible mistake again.

Already said, but I have to repeat. The belay device is not upside down...I have no idea what you meant, it would be interesting to see what kind of job it would do if it were... :?

two points----one, if the picture posted is the same as in the article (haven't read the article) there is nothing wrong with the orientation of the rope....the strand "on top" is going to the climber

people using it have no greater chance of dropping their leader than any other technique (provided they are familiar with it).

I vehemently disagree with you, and I explained why in my earlier post.

In addition, dropping your leader isn't the only way to fail him, to cause him injury. JT is right - even if you don't drop someone, you stand a good chance of short-roping the leader to the point where he takes a leader fall. Lead falls are dangerous, and people get hurt, sometimes badly, from taking them all the time.

GO

well i have caught many falls just like this and have belayed 100s of climbs just like this...i didn't get it out of a magazine...i just did what i thought would be safer and work to get around what i deem to be the more awkward method that is taught in the gyms. Many of these 1000s of climbers doing this live in Oregon and california...i have climbed with people in Yosemite, tuolumne meadows, Donner, lovers leap, placerville, Smith Rocks Oregon, and many other local crags across the west who belay very similar to this. I believe many of you are not understanding the true technique being portrayed here...perhaps its confusing if this isn't your style, but if it is you get it...many things are like this...dangerous? worthless? maybe that is just your posts? I think we should hesitate to call anything worthless that others are saying isn't.

This is being way way overanalyzed...the reason the photos are slightly different is because obviously they aren't belaying...they are take pictures...they are posed...either way you can catch a lead fall...i have done it...i believe one is better than the other...the obviously better one.

These steps are done quickly...and i don't feel awkward at all...this most certainly wont change my belay technique

the reason the photos are slightly different is because obviously they aren't belaying...they are take pictures...they are posed

joshua tree. remember?

By saying that it is wrong, it would seem that you are implying that someone will die using that technique, which is obviously not the case. I agree that it perhaps isn't the best possible technique, especially for feeding out slack....

Yeah, and who needs to feed out slack, anyway? :roll:

Jay

Remember? No. But I'm not surprised, with all the gumbies that that place attracts these days.

Jay

while you were gone.

RC.com at its finest

Didn't NOLS or OB teach this as THE belay method for a while? not that this means it's any good, I didn't like it then and I don't like it now.

They also insist on teaching the around-the-back lock off rather than showing how to increase friction by keeping you hand down in front of you, below the belay device.

Horseonwheels, whatever floats your boat. I don't want any of my belayers using it, though, and I'm *certainly* not teaching it to any of my students.

By the way, you say you use essentially the same method. What are the differences between what you do and what is pictured? Do you have the arm-cross-through on the *body* side (as opposed to the outside) of the lead rope each time the brake hand is reset? This is the main problem with the technique, IMHO.

GO

Yeah, and who needs to feed out slack, anyway? Rolling Eyes

Jay

My main issue is with a lot of people here proclaiming that there is only one correct way to belay.

So, for a leader to say that they wouldn't get a belay by someone using a technique that the leader isn't familiar with, it's rather ridiculous.

My main issue is with 5.7 n00bs proclaiming anything about belaying.

You might notice that climbers climbing at a higher level of difficulty, who by necessity demand a higher level of performance from their belayers, are the ones most likely to oppose the 5-point lock-down belay method.

I am not talking out of my ass when I say that such a technique will result in short-roping and other problems. We have all been belayed by people who use similar techniques and have learned the shortcomings of them firsthand.

Jay

Does anyone else believe that if your braking hand is too close to the belay device (as shown in several of their pics) that the belayer could get their hand caught between the rope and device in a fall, which tends to really hurt and is also quite dangerous for the leader?

I actually don't cross my guide hand over the body side of the lead rope. I pass it on the outside (with the lead rope between my head and hands). If that's really your only objection to it, the I guess we're somewhat in aggreement.

However, many of the posts have said that basically the whole article was crap, which it isn't.

There's nothing wrong with having the rope locked off at all times, as long as you're an attentive belayer (as you should be regardless of technique).

My main issue is with a lot of people here proclaiming that there is only one correct way to belay. That isn't the case, as proven by the numerous types of belay devices and techniques. So, for a leader to say that they wouldn't get a belay by someone using a technique that the leader isn't familiar with, it's rather ridiculous.

http://climbing.com/techtips/ttsport225/

That's a much better job of explaining it, and was out years before this R&I article.

Why did they draw the belay device upside down though?

Either way, this is a lot closer to what I do, and what I teach.

Obviously I haven't been climbing as long as you, as you haven't been climbing as long as many others. Feel free to call me a noob if it makes you feel superior. However, after climbing for 3 years, including sport, trad, and aid, I certainly know what works for me and what doesn't.

I know plenty of people that climb harder than me, have climbed for less time, and know a lot less than I do.

Also, I never said this is the best technique for all applications including chasing 5.12's. It is however a technique that is relevant on many climbs, and not dangerous if you know how to do it.

Still sucks. The rope should not be locked off by default. I repeat: the brake side of the rope should be kept at most 90 degrees from the leader's side of the rope. This allows the belayer to instantly payout slack, take in slack, or lock off to catch a fall. If the rope is already locked off, the belayer can't respond fast enough to the climber. I do not let people belay me on anything I might actually fall on if they use this technique.

This method is easier to teach than the classical pinch-and-slide method, but is too slow and inflexible for lead belaying someone on a hard route. The student, if initially taught this method, will have to eventually learn a more advanced technique. Thus, the only person who really benefits from this belay method is the instructor, whose workload, especially in a group setting, is reduced.

Jay

http://climbing.com/techtips/ttsport225/

That's a much better job of explaining it, and was out years before this R&I article.

Look Jay,

I'll be happy to discuss the merits of certain belay techniques with you, but calling me ignorant and trying to discredit me by telling me how much harder you climb is ridiculous.

My whole argument is that there are certain times when keeping the rope locked off at nearly all times is good, or at least perfectly acceptable. Such as:

*toproping

*when the leader or follower is out of sight

In fact, when bringing up a second, and belaying off of the harness when the second is out of sight, sometimes the only option is to use almost exactly how R&I shows. That is, to cross the guide hand over the body and keep the rope locked nearly all of the time.

I disagree, I've belayed plenty of people up hard climbs, and it works just fine. I've taken arms lengths of slack out during a fall with no problem using this technique.

Everyone I climb with perfers this technique, and I expect my belayers to do the same for me.

It works totally fine in all situations(and I do more than toprope, in case Jay needs to know).

IMHO the best belay technique is the one that is going to minimize the possibility of the leader hitting a horizontal surface (or a vertical surface during a pendulum).

Ah yes, the "it works fine" fallacy. The fallacy is that you haven't defined what "works fine" means. I have stated a half dozen reasons why it doesn't "work fine," and you haven't presented a single counterargument to any of them. I am forced to conclude that the only reason you think this method "works fine" is that your standards are low; that is, you, like most climbers, don't understand what constitutes really good belaying.

Jay

I agree with Jay on this one. Many reasons have been given why this method sucks, but the best the defenders of this method can do is say things like "it works fine", "I have been doing it this way for years", and "there is more than one way to do things". I have shown five full guides this method (as described in Rock and Ice) they all think it is a terrible article, full of flaws, but it doesn't take a pro to see that. I have lost all respect for Rock and Ice. Jay you present some good points but I think that if most climbers as you stated "do not understand what constitutes good belaying" there would be many more accidents in climbing.

Most belayers belay well enough to keep their partners from hitting the deck, but that's where it usually stops:

[*:a5d2d59824]Only a minority of belayers understand the importance of dynamic belaying.

[*:a5d2d59824]Among the group above, only a minority can actually execute a dynamic belay reliably.

[*:a5d2d59824]The number of belayers who keep too much slack in the rope at the start of a pitch is astounding.

[*:a5d2d59824]When toproping, few belayers keep enough tension in the rope to protect the climber as he leaves the ground, and nearly all keep too much tension in the rope as he nears the anchor.

Shall I go on?

Jay

There are of course many minor/almost fatal accidents caused by bad belaying that you never hear of, broken ankles for example.

Then you had time to take in arms lengths of slack. That's not the issue. The issue (one issue, anyway) is when you don't have time; say, when the leader unexpectedly falls while clipping the second bolt of a sport climb. You have a split second to react. The best you can hope to do is to fall onto your ass and yard in a foot or two of slack. But, if your rope is locked off, you don't have time to unlock it first to pull out slack. All you can do is sit, and your leader will fall an extra couple of feet, which can be the difference between him decking and not.


The only explanation I can have for that is that everyone you climb with is a relative beginner, or at least not very advanced in their belay technique. For instance, please explain how you would provide a dynamic belay in repsonse to an unexpected lead fall while at a hanging belay with the rope locked off.

Jay

Sorry, but I don't climb much with people who risk decking at a clip.

Really? Huh.

Most of the people I climb with risk decking on most of their leads.

Most of them are aware of that risk though.

DMT

. the technique they were trying to describe is proper. A University study was conducted in the early 1980s comparing supination to pronation of the belay brake hand when using common belay devices. The study showed pronation to be superior in every way to supination when the method was used by belayers accustomed to the technique..

How would I provide a dynamic belay at a hanging belay? Hmm...good one. Let's see, by dynamic you must be talking about providing a softer catch...yes? Well, if I'm hanging, then I'll get pulled up (giving a softer catch) and let the rope run a little if appropriate.

If your asking about taking slack in, in a circumstance where if the leader blows the clip they'll deck...well odds are I'm paying pretty friggin close attention and I'm ready to take slack in...so your right, that brake strand might not be totally locked off

...it might be rising up a little at that moment. But once they have the clip that rope is going back down.

Sorry, but I don't climb much with people who risk decking at a clip. We usually place more gear before that point...or don't climb the route...or it's well within our ability and we don't fall.

I understand the point your trying to make, but I think this belay technique (which I've tried to describe as being different than the one presented in R&I) is an excellent technique to learn, provides a greater safety margin, and can be easilly deviated from in those rare circumstances where a desperate clip might result in a nasty whipper.

But the technique they were trying to describe is proper.

The thing to keep in mind is that the purpose of belaying is to stop the rope from quickly paying out.

But you can't let the rope run a little if you already have it locked off.

So, we are in agreement: When you actually want to belay well, you can't use the technique in the magazine; the rope cannot be locked off.

Why, so that if they fall unexpectedly, you once again won't be able to do anything useful?

I think that is the source of your misunderstanding. You climb with people who don't fall much in the first place, so you have never had to become more proficient in your belay technique.

No one, you included, has yet to explain what this greater safety margin actually is. In fact, by your own arguments, you have shown that the safety margin is greater when you keep the rope in a position from which you can take in or let out slack more quickly, which is precisely what I have been arguing, as well.

Jay

...but your an idiot for putting yourself in that situation in the first place.

unless you just ease your grip a little....

not do anythign usefull? what, like catch the f--- climber?

Suck it up...it's your fault you fell, I don't need to put a pillow under your ass everytime you mess up.

The greater safety margin is being locked off a higher percentage of the time. If you place good gear, and space it corrently...then there is no issue with it. The belayer is more likely to hold a fall that they don't see coming.

If you want to be a fool, and risk hitting ledges and place gear that'll rip out without 2 screamers and a super dynamic belay...that's your own deal. If you climb in a manor that nescessitates this kind of belay...I think you should rethink what your doing.

So, the technique I've propossed works...provided your being a responsible leader and protecting yourself as you should.

You should actually try what you are theorizing about. Unless the fall is severe, the rope won't slip through the device with the rope held in the locked-off postition, even with a loose grip. Okay, maybe with a low-friction device, like the original ATC, and a slick, new, thin rope, it'll slip a little.

That's all you'll be able to do, and if you think that is all you are supposed to do, then you won't be belaying me anytime soon.


If that's your attitude, then, as a belayer, you flat-out suck.

That sounds good, and in fact, is the fallacy on which this silly locked-off belay style is based on. The fact is that you can easily hold an unexpected fall that occurs while you've got the ropes in front of you, even if you are staring down at your shoes when the fall occurs. You simply lock off when you start to feel tension in the rope. A few inches of rope may slip through the device if the fall is close to factor 1, which is usually for the best, anyway.

What little box do you live in? Most of the rest of us do fall from time to time, do climb above ledges occasionally, and sometimes have to deal with less than perfect protection. Have you ever heard of sport climbing? What do you think it entails. Without a purposeful dynamic belay, you will eventually break your partner's ankle./

Its like you and Jay are speaking completely different languages. Its weird. Let me translate:

Jay is primmarily talking about overhanging sport routes, with mandatory runs between the bolts.

You are not. You are talking moderate trad.

Its a different animal, with different belay priorities. Your comments completely ignore those differences.

DMT

FYI... this really bears repeating:

Need I remind you how many sport climbers give dynamic belays on sport routes with grigri's.

Every sport route I belay with a grigri, the climber gets a dynamic belay, once decking is not a possibility.

I'm not saying all grigri belayers do this, but your comment suggests that you don't think it's possible, or common practice among spot climbers.

Jay...your just contradicting yourself. You state the purpose of not being locked off is so you can take more slack in...then admit that with this technique "a few inches of slack may slip through".

Your more than welcome to try and tell the AMGA they're wrong in their approach of teaching this technique, as well as two climbing magazines publishing articles in support of this technique.

I can see no benefit to AMGA's method except one: it is faster to teach, especially in a group setting. That is, the only person to benefit from this belay method is the instructor, while the student is done a disservice by being taught an inferior belay method.

It is interesting that you cite the Climbing article in support of your use of this technique, because the Climbing article stressed that the method was useful for teaching to belayers for toproping. Although, I don't even agree with it for that purpose, I would like to commend you for being a supposedly experienced climber who is using a beginning toprope belay method to belay lead climbers.

Jay

I taught several climbing courses with K.C. Baum of the American Mountain Guides Association Technical Committee. He recommended that I start teaching a more reliable, easier-to-master belay: the “hands-down” method. One demo and I was convinced — this is a better belay to teach, especially for toproping.
......
The hands-down method is all I use and teach anymore, and I’m told it’s gaining popularity with gyms and climbing schools. First-time climbers and grizzled mountain guides alike can benefit from this simpler, more foolproof belay.

hmm, should I listen to you...or Climbing :

I am amazed at how many belayers do not know where to stand. If there leader were to fall early, at best, they would get a massive rope burn, at worst they would be tripped upside down or fall on their belayer.

Josh

Jesus, did I miss the memo where belayers have to get belayed now, too?

By the way, this whole "rope locked off at all times thing" is great for toproping. Everything in its place.

GO

The argument for the technique seems to be coming largely from trad climbers who would avoid falling, or don’t fall on a regular bases. In this instance a technique where the rope is locked of may be better. If your only catching one or two falls(and therefore are not necessarily expecting a fall) and you are not required feeding out slack quickly, then it makes some sense to have the rope locked of.

among some trad climbers, there exists an unconscionable philosophy, as expressed by jimdavis, that the belayer has little or no responsibility to protect the leader from injury, beyond preventing him from hitting the ground if he falls.

The argument in favor of the locked off belay is coming entirely from inexperienced trad climbers who have had the misfortune of being taught a mediocre belay technique. The locked-off belay is essentially a "lazy" technique, in which the rope is kept locked off, rather than continually adjusted with the climber's movements. I cannot think of a single example, from either trad or sport climbing, where keeping the rope locked off would be superior to keeping the amount of slack fine tuned.

Belaying principles are identical for trad and sport climbing. However, many trad climbers never learn to belay with the proficiency of a sport climber. The reasons are at least twofold: (1) trad climbers have fewer opportunities to catch falls and observe the consequences of poorly developed belay technique, and (2) among some trad climbers, there exists an unconscionable philosophy, as expressed by jimdavis, that the belayer has little or no responsibility to protect the leader from injury, beyond preventing him from hitting the ground if he falls.

Jay

this should help you.......
at least you cannot pull pieces

http://thewildrumpus.com/rubyfall/2.jpg

http://thewildrumpus.com/rubyfall/3.jpg

http://thewildrumpus.com/rubyfall/4.jpg

http://thewildrumpus.com/rubyfall/5.jpg

http://thewildrumpus.com/rubyfall/6.jpg

http://thewildrumpus.com/rubyfall/7.jpg

http://thewildrumpus.com/rubyfall/8.jpg

http://thewildrumpus.com/rubyfall/9.jpg

no, these are not my photos, i stole them from here

She has the palms up grip. While the leader decked, you will note she never lost her grip on the rope.

Although, I pretty much agree with you Jay, on multipitch trad climbs do you routinely try to give dynamic belays? For instance, suppose you're at a tiny belay ledge, anchored in with a directional for an upward pull. If your leader is 10 feet above her 5th piece (say about 60ft above the belay on a dead vertical wall) and falls unexpectedly, are you trying to pay out some slack and then lock off the belay in the approx. 3/4 of a second it takes to fall approx. 20ft?

Still, her fingers never left her hand...

DMT

hum...never had that happen to me but, once I took a little white pill and my toes ate my socks.

cl

The argument in favor of the locked off belay is coming entirely from inexperienced trad climbers who have had the misfortune of being taught a mediocre belay technique. The locked-off belay is essentially a "lazy" technique, in which the rope is kept locked off, rather than continually adjusted with the climber's movements.

I cannot think of a single example, from either trad or sport climbing, where keeping the rope locked off would be superior to keeping the amount of slack fine tuned.

Belaying principles are identical for trad and sport climbing. However, many trad climbers never learn to belay with the proficiency of a sport climber. The reasons are at least twofold: (1) trad climbers have fewer opportunities to catch falls and observe the consequences of poorly developed belay technique, and (2) among some trad climbers, there exists an unconscionable philosophy, as expressed by jimdavis, that the belayer has little or no responsibility to protect the leader from injury, beyond preventing him from hitting the ground if he falls.

Jay

Borrowed from the afraid to lead thread. I looked with interest at the belayers reactions to the two pieces popping. She has the palms up grip. While the leader decked, you will note she never lost her grip on the rope.

In particular, look at the rope slack come and go between the 2nd and 4th shots.

DMT

Yeah...and look at her rope possition in pic 4...where the rope is tensioned...and she's not locked off.

Like you guys said she had a grigri...but if that were a tube device he'd have fallen furthor there.